THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA - tzdpg.or.tz · PDF fileTHE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA...
Transcript of THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA - tzdpg.or.tz · PDF fileTHE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA...
THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
Mid-Term Review for the Public Finance
Management Reform Program Phase Four
Tanzania
Final Report
September 2015
INN VEX
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 ii | P a g e
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acronyms................................................................................................................................................................. 3
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................................
4
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 INNOVEX CONSULTANT TEAM ................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 PERIOD OF ASSIGNMENT ......................................................................................................................... 1
1.4 REVIEW REPORTING ................................................................................................................................ 1
2 ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS AGAINST THE STRATEGIC GOAL AND MAIN OBJECTIVES 3
2.1 THE PURPOSE AND GOAL OF PFMRP PHASE IV ....................................................................................... 4
2.2 SCOPE AND COVERAGE OF PFMRP ......................................................................................................... 4
2.2.1 Key result areas and overall purpose and goals ............................................................................... 5
2.2.2 Key result areas addressing PEFA identified PFM weaknesses ....................................................... 5
2.2.3 PFMRP IV addressing current PFM weaknesses ............................................................................. 9
2.3 IDENTIFICATION OF PRIORITIES .............................................................................................................. 13
2.4 THE KEY RESULT AREAS, OUTPUTS AND THE PFM CYCLE ...................................................................... 14
2.5 THE NATURE OF THE PFMRP OUTPUTS AND MILESTONES ....................................................................... 17
2.5.1 Outputs relative to their key result areas ......................................................................................... 18
2.5.2 Milestones relative to their outputs .................................................................................................. 19
2.5.3 Outputs and outcomes versus inputs .............................................................................................. 20
2.5.4 Linkages and dependencies ............................................................................................................ 21
2.5.5 A reform programme or a funding programme ................................................................................ 21
2.6 AN ASSESSMENT OF PROGRESS AGAINST THE PFMRP IV PLANNED INTERMEDIATE RESULTS ................... 21
2.7 AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONTRIBUTION, BY OUTPUT AND MILESTONE, TO PROGRESS IN ACHIEVING THE
OUTPUTS AND GENERAL GOALS OF THE PROGRAMME ........................................................................................... 23
2.7.1 Progress in achieving the higher outputs and general goals by output and milestone .................... 23
2.7.2 Sequencing of activities and value for money ................................................................................. 24
2.7.3 Choice of outputs, milestones and activities ................................................................................... 24
2.8 IMPACT OF PHASE IV CAPACITY BUILDING AND STUDIES .......................................................................... 25
2.8.1 Impact of capacity building and training .......................................................................................... 25
2.8.2 Impact of studies ............................................................................................................................. 27
2.9 AN ANALYSIS OF BUDGET EXECUTION PER KEY RESULT AREA, OUTPUT AND MILESTONE ............................ 28
2.10 AN ANALYSIS OF BUDGET EXECUTION PER KEY RESULT AREA, COMPONENT AND SOURCE OF FUNDING ...... 30
2.11 A BROAD REVIEW OF THE NATURE OF ACTIVITIES FINANCED BY THE PFMRP IV ........................................ 31
2.12 A BROAD REVIEW OF THE IMPACT OF PFMRP IV ON OTHER NATIONAL REFORMS, MDGS AND GENERAL
POVERTY REDUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 32
3 ASSESSMENT OF THE FACTORS AFFECTING PROGRESS AND GOOD IMPLEMENTATION
33
3.1 IMPACT OF THE MANAGEMENT, COORDINATION, AND INSTITUTIONAL SETTINGS OF THEPROGRAMME .......... 33
3.2 IMPACT OF THE VARIOUS FUNDING MECHANISMS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION .............................................. 34
3.3 REVIEW OF MONITORING TOOLS AND PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ............................................. 34
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 iii | P a g e
3.4 PERFORMANCE OF THE PFMRP SECRETARIAT AND THE PFM JOINT STEERING COMMITTEE .................... 35
3.5 STAKEHOLDER MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................ 36
3.6 RISKS TO THE ACHIEVEMENT OF PFMRP IV OUTCOMES.......................................................................... 37
4 EMERGING PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT ISSUES ........................................................ 38
4.1 TREATMENT OF OIL AND GAS REVENUES ................................................................................................. 38
4.2 BRN – BIG RESULTS NOW ..................................................................................................................... 39
5 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE FOR THE PUBLIC FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
REFORM PROGRAMME, PHASE IV. .................................................................................................. 41
5.1 IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CONTENT OF THE REFORM PROGRAMME .............................................................. 41
5.2 IMPROVEMENTS IN INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ................................................................................ 42
5.3 IMPROVEMENTS IN FUNDING MECHANISMS AND FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE ............................................... 43
5.4 IMPROVEMENTS IN MONITORING AND EVALUATION, AND REPORTING FORMATS ......................................... 44
APPENDIX 1 – TERMS OF REFERENCE ............................................................................................ 45
APPENDIX 2 – CONSULTANT TASKS FROM THE TERMS OF REFERENCE AND ASSOCIATED
REPORT CONTENT ............................................................................................................................. 55
APPENDIX 3 – DOCUMENTS .............................................................................................................. 57
APPENDIX 4 – STAKEHOLDERS CONSULTED ................................................................................. 60
APPENDIX 5 – IPSASS SELECTED EXTRACTS ................................................................................ 63
APPENDIX 6 – PROGRESS IN THE PFMRP IV OUTPUTS................................................................. 64
APPENDIX 7 – BUDGET COMPARED WITH ACTUAL EXPENDITURE FOR KEY RESULT AREAS,
OUTPUTS AND MILESTONES........................................................................................................... 140
APPENDIX 8 – BUDGET COMPARED WITH ACTUAL RELEASES FOR KEY RESULT AREAS,
OUTPUTS AND MILESTONES........................................................................................................... 149
APPENDIX 9 – RELEASES COMPARED WITH ACTUAL EXPENDITUREFOR KEY RESULT
AREAS, OUTPUTS AND MILESTONES ............................................................................................ 158
APPENDIX 10 – FINANCES FOR COMPONENTS BY SOURCE ...................................................... 167
APPENDIX 11– RISK ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 168
Table 1 PEFA PIs with Significant Departures from Good Practice 6
Table 2 KRA Outputs Addressing Less Critical PEFA Ratings 8
Table 3 Extent of Achievement of Burning Issues/Quick Wins 13
Table 4 Key Result Areas and the PFM Cycle 14
Table 5 Key Result Areas and Component Managers 17
Table 6 Key Result Area and Output Mismatches 18
Table 7 Output and Milestone Mismatches 19
Table 8 Categories of Milestones 20
Table 9 Achievement of Planned Intermediate Results 22
Table 10 Summary of milestone achievement 24
Table 11 Training initiatives and comments on impact 26
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 iv | P a g e
Table 12 Studies and comments on impact. 27
Table 13 PFMRP IV comparison of budget, releases and actual expenditure 28
Table 14 Variance between budget and actual expenditure 29
Table 15 Variance between budget and releases 29
Table 16 Variance between releases and actual expenditure 29
Table 17 PFMRP IV budget, releases and expenditure to date 30
Table 18 BRN's National Key Result Areas 39
Figure 1 The public financial management cycle .................................................................................................... 3
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 v | P a g e
Acronyms
ACGEN Accountant General ACL Propriety computer-assisted audit technology AFRITAC Africa Regional Technical Assistance Centre AFROSAI-E African Organisation of English-speaking Supreme Audit
Institutions AMP AID Management Platform BoT Bank of Tanzania CAG Controller and Auditor General CDR Council development reports CFR Council financial reports COFOG Classification of the functions of government DAHRM Department of Administration and HRM DCF Development Cooperation Framework DFID UK Department for International Development DP Development Partner EPICOR The trade name for an integrated package of financial
management applications (see IFMIS) FY Financial year GDP Gross Domestic Product GFS Government Finance Statistics GoT Government of Tanzania HQ Head quarters HR Human resources HRM Human resource management ICT Information and communication technology IFMIS Integrated Financial Management Information System IFMS see IFMIS IFRS International Financial Reporting Standards IMTC Inter-Ministerial Technical Committee IPSAS International Public Sector Accounting Standards ISSAIs International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions ISA International Standards on Auditing IT Information technology JAST Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania JSC Joint Steering Committee LGA Local government authority M&E Monitoring and evaluation MDA Ministry, department, agency MDGs Millennium Development Goals MIS Management information system MKUKUTA National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty MoF Ministry of Finance MoU Memorandum of Understanding
MTEF Medium-term expenditure framework
MTFF Medium-term fiscal framework MTSPBM Medium Term Strategic Planning and Budgeting Manual NAOT National Audit Office Tanzania NPP National Procurement Policy PAC Public Accounts Committee PAF Performance assessment framework PCCB Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau PE Public entity PEFA Public Expenditure & Financial Accountability Framework
Assessment PER Public expenditure review PFM Public financial management PFMRP Public Financial Management Reform Programme PFMRP III PFM Reform Programme Phase 3 PFMRP IV PFM Reform Programme Phase 4 PI Performance Indicator PM Programme Manager PMC Programme Management Committee PMIS Procurement management information system PMO Prime Minister’s Office PMO-RALG PMO-Regional Administration and Local Government PMU Project management unit PO-PSM President’s Office – Public Service Management PPA Public Procurement Act PPAA Public Procurement Appeals Authority PPPD Public Procurement Policy Division PPRA Public Procurement Regulatory Authority RIMKU National reporting system for MKUKUTA RS Regional Administration Secretariat SIDA Swedish International Development Agency SBAS Strategic Budget Allocation System TNA Training needs assessment TORs Terms of Reference TR Treasury Registrar TRO Treasury Registrar Office TRA Tanzania Revenue Authority TRIMS Tower Records Information Management System TWG Technical Working Group TZS Tanzania shillings VFM Value for money WAN Wide area network WB World Bank
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 vi | P a g e
Executive Summary
This is a report of the mid-term review of the Public Finance Management Reform Program, Phase Four (PFMRP
IV) in Tanzania. Innovex Development Consulting Ltd. were contracted by the Government of Tanzania (GoT) to
carry out the review during June, July and August 2015.
In order to respond to the agreed terms of reference the review team undertook a review of documentation and
meetings with stakeholders. Stakeholders consulted included programme management, implementers, financiers
and beneficiaries. Broadly in the conduct of this review the review team: made an assessment of progress
against the strategic goal and main objectives; made an assessment of the factors affecting progress and good
implementation; and looked at some emerging public financial management issues. The report makes critical
observations on the PFM arrangements envisaged for the treatment of oil and gas revenues. It also makes
comments on the impact of PFMRP IV on the major constraints identified in the BRN initiative.
In respect of the reform programme, the review found that PFMRP IV is generally regarded as:
Extremely important, indeed critical, to the future development of public financial management in the
Government of Tanzania.
This is evidenced by the broad spectrum of public financial management related initiatives that are
included in the programme and the extent to which critical funding is provided by it. There are
challenges related to the sustainable legacy of the programme.
A success story with a history of achievement.
This is evidenced in the assessment of progress against the strategic goal and main objectives within
the report where despite the spend being well below that planned the report estimates that more than
63% of the programme’s milestones are 50% or more achieved, with more than 42% being 95% or
more achieved.
Under good management and control.
This is partly evidenced by the report’s findings that by far the majority of key result area content i.e.
outputs and milestones directly contribute to the overall goal of the programme but mainly is shown by
the importance, success and achievement previously mentioned.
From the disclosures to the review, the team is also reasonably assured that PFMRP IV is:
Progressing in line with its overall expectations of planned achievement.
Focusing on the strategic aspects of the Programme the review identified the following aspects
Distinction between the PFM cycles of GoT, LGAs and Zanzibar
Critical issues affecting PFM across GoT
Ownership of each reform initiative by individual component managers
Sustainability of the reform programme to improve PFM in long-run
Identification of critical and priority initiatives
Consistency of PFMRP IV outputs with good PFM practice
Availability of development expenditure at end of financial year
Effective arrangements to facilitate measurement of impacts of training, studies and other initiative
undertaken by the programme
Stakeholder arrangements that facilitates achievement of PFMRP objectives
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 vii | P a g e
Proactive positioning of PFMRP secretariat.
The review team identified a number of areas surrounding the strategic aspects where the successful progress of
PFMRP IV1 faces challenges and makes recommendations to address them. The challenges and associated
recommendations are summarised below.
1 Challenge:
To establish clear distinctions between the PFM cycles of GoT, LGAs and Zanzibar so that the separate legal and institutional arrangements are respected and strengthened.
Recommendations:
Initiatives should be separately identified, monitored and managed for separate PFM processes and cycles.
2 Challenge:
To ensure that the reform programme focusses on the issues critically affecting PFM across GoT
Recommendations:
The width, complexity and ambition of the programme should be managed to ensure sufficient attention is given to the priority initiatives that address the core PFM processes.
The programme should pay more attention to effectiveness of non-salary expenditure and timeliness and regularity of accounts reconciliation. These are identified by PEFA as being critical areas of poor PFM performance.
The PFMRP should include initiatives to look at ways to include all aspects of the PFM cycle in the transition from cash to accrual accounting so that the benefits of this transition can improve the whole cycle. This means that current assets and current liabilities are fully and promptly identified ensuring that payment arrears and revenue/tax collection arrears are known and controlled. This would make the transition from cash to accrual a truly reforming exercise rather than the technical accounting exercise that it is currently.
The PFMRP should also include an initiative that looks at the statutory financial statements, their purpose, their need and how they should be produced. Since the Government of Tanzania intends to be a regional leader in the adoption of accrual based accounting, it must include in the reform programme the necessary legislative review that ensures that the positions of the various funds and controlled entities of the various levels of government can be appropriately consolidated to produce meaningful reports to the legislature, shareholders and public whilst at the same time meeting international accounting and reporting standards.
3 Challenge:
To determine a clear ownership of each reform initiative by individual component managers.
Recommendations:
Initiatives should be organised to address, reform and improve discrete parts of the PFM cycle. This ensures ownership by component managers and tends to eliminate duplication. We have identified a potential set of key result areas that could implement this recommendation.
There should be a very clear ownership of each milestone by a component manager. That ownership should be recorded in the M&E Framework document.
1 It is important to note that PFMRP when referred to in the report does not represent PFM but rather the programme under review
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 viii | P a g e
4 Challenge:
To ensure that the reform programme is sustainable and improves PFM in the long-term.
Recommendations:
Outputs, milestones and associated initiatives should be designed to create sustainable reform and not to simply fund recurrent expenditure.
As an investment activity the acquisition of a capital asset should not be considered a reforming activity and hence excluded.
5 Challenge:
To ensure that critical and priority initiatives are identified and duly undertaken.
Recommendations:
Linkages and dependencies between milestones should be established to ensure that the critical paths for the reform can be more easily identified.
Output and milestone priorities should be identified.
A general review of all milestones and activities should be undertaken to eliminate those where the need and achievement of value for money is less certain
6 Challenge:
To ensure that PFMRP IV outputs are consistent with good PFM practice.
Recommendations:
The DPS PFM should take a more active and prominent role in overall PFMRP management and guidance and particularly in ensuring that the reform programme is not undertaking activity that results in inconsistency with good PFM practice.
There is a need for a capable PFM Adviser.
JSC should meet every three months and take a much more active role in the quality review of reform programme outputs.
7 Challenge:
To ensure that development expenditure remains available at the end of a financial year.
Recommendations:
Current GoT rules and regulations do not distinguish between the procedures for budgetary control over development and recurrent activities, even though the natures of the two activities are obviously different. DPS PFM as part of PFMRP IV should supervise an initiative that looks into and recommends a solution to this problem.
8 Challenge:
To make effective arrangements so that the impact of training, studies and other initiatives can be measured.
Recommendations:
Benchmark measurements should be undertaken prior to and at some time post an initiative being undertaken. The first part of any future reform programme must be measurement of a set of
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 ix | P a g e
carefully considered and comprehensive benchmarks.
Milestones should ideally relate to measurable outputs. Where they do not, a related output milestone should be established.
9 Challenge:
To maintain good stakeholder relationships so that they facilitate achievement.
Recommendations:
Stakeholders not only need to be kept informed, they also need to be actively engaged and managed. We recommend that a much more pro-active stakeholder management strategy be adopted by the programme management and be facilitated by the PFMRP Secretariat.
10 Challenge:
To improve the pro-active positioning of the PFMRP Secretariat.
Recommendations:
The PFMRP Secretariat staff should prepare individual detailed time-bound work plans against which they themselves, the Programme Manager and the DPS PFM can measure achievement.
The PFMRP Secretariat should keep files, and have them available for use, of meeting papers, minutes, resolutions and the like for all JSC, PMC and TWG meetings. The secretariat should also retain copies of all component managers detailed and costed work plans for the achievement of each of their milestones.
DPS PFM should ensure that the secretariat’s finance specialist has access to up to date data from the IFMIS on the financial performance of the component managers’ use of funds.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 1 | P a g e
1 Introduction
1.1 INNOVEX Consultant Team
This review has been undertaken by INNOVEX personnel: Leonard Chacha Kitoka - Assignment Director, James
Tapera – Consultant, Daniel Mburu Njenga - Consultant, and Robert Edward Hawkins - Team Leader.
1.2 Terms of Reference
The terms of reference (TORs) for the review are given in Appendix 1 – Terms of Reference. This is a second
set of terms of reference and substituted those in place at the time the contract for this review was signed. In our
inception report we highlighted newly introduced areas of activity which we would only be able to address at a
high level. In particular, the consultant tasks 5 (h) and (i) to be carried out in sufficient detail require specific
benchmark measurements to have been established and undertaken prior to and post both training and study
initiatives. Since these have not been undertaken as part of the reform programme, detailed impact
assessments cannot be made.
Since the list of tasks for the consultant given in the terms of reference are inappropriate for a report format for
reader convenience we have cross referenced the tasks in the TORs with the content of this report in Appendix 2
– Consultant tasks from the terms of reference and associated report content.
1.3 Period of Assignment
The period of engagement in field work in Tanzania has been from the 8th June to 24th July 2015. During that
time the approach taken by the consultant team was: to meet with as many stakeholders in the Public Financial
Management Reform Programme as possible; review reports, minutes of meetings and other documentation (the
significant documents are listed in Appendix 3 – Documents); undertake data collection as required; and
formulate the findings and conclusions contained in this report. The list of documents obtained during the review
appears extensive, however, it must be recorded that the review team had much difficulty in obtaining reports
and documentation. A list of stakeholders met and consulted is given in Appendix 4 – Stakeholders consulted.
This report was presented to stakeholders on 13th August at the MoF Board room where comments were raised
and have been incorporated in this report.
1.4 Review Reporting
This is the final report of the review. It is presented after a final presentation to and consultation with
stakeholders that was held on 13th August and incorporates stakeholder comments that we received from the
client on 18th August 2015. The format of the report largely follows the structure required to meet the terms of
reference, however, it may not necessary be arranged in the format of the terms of reference for the purposes
allow reading flow. There are four principal sections beyond this introduction:
Section 2: Assessment of progress against the strategic goal and main objectives
In this section we review the purpose, goal, priorities, scope and coverage of PFMRP IV. This is followed by a
review of the key result areas, components, outputs and milestones and an assessment of progress made
against planned results. We make an assessment of the impact of capacity building and studies undertaken as
part of the programme. Subsequently we present an analysis of budget execution by key result area, component
and source of funding.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 2 | P a g e
Section 3: Assessment of the factors affecting progress and good implementation
In section 3 we look at the factors affecting programme implementation, both positive and negative. We review
the management and institutional arrangements for the programme, the monitoring tools and management
systems and the engagement of stakeholders. Finally in this section we look at the risks to the achievement of
PFMRP IV planned outcomes.
Section 4: Emerging public financial management issues
In this section we examine the public financial reform implications of the proposed treatment of oil and gas
revenue and the contribution of PFMRP IV to the ‘Big Results Now’ initiative.
Section 5: Recommendations for the future for the Public Financial Management Reform Programme,
Phase IV
In this final section we make recommendations to secure improvements in the choice of areas of PFM to be
targeted by reforms, in the institutional arrangements to support reform, in funding mechanisms and financial
performance, and in monitoring and evaluation and reporting formats.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 3 | P a g e
2 Assessment of progress against the strategic goal and main objectives
At its core, public financial management is a cycle established to ensure that plans and budgets are converted
into correspondingly defined actions, that are in turn monitored and reviewed to ensure compliance, and
subsequently reviewed to establish whether the outcome is as originally planned. Lessons learnt from the review
process are then used to refine the plans and budgets to better secure the desired outcome in the future.
6. Reporting
and audit
1. Policy
review
3. Budget
preparation
2. Strategic
planning
5.
Accounting
and
monitoring
4. Budget
execution
Figure 1 The public financial management cycle2
Therefore, the public financial management cycle is specifically designed to ensure that financial resources are
used for the purposes intended, that value for money is achieved and transactions are properly accounted for.
The PFM cycle is hence the vehicle for the management, mitigation and elimination of fiduciary risk. All fiduciary
risks result from a failure or weaknesses somewhere in the operation of the public financial management cycle.
The cycle’s integrity is established by the legislative and institutional arrangements put in place. The passing of
legislation does not in itself secure a sound PFM cycle. The legislative and institutional arrangements actually
need to be implemented to ensure that:
i. The PFM cycle is distinct, hence:
responsibility for the planning, usage, control and review of specific financial resources is clearly
defined;
accountability for performance is known and transparent; and
the same set of financial resources is engaged throughout the cycle.
ii. There is appropriate separation of powers and responsibilities for the various parts of the cycle to guarantee
that each provides an independent check on the performance of another.
2 DFID How to note. Managing Fiduciary Risk when Providing Financial Aid
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 4 | P a g e
All of this both secures a robust PFM cycle and ensures that weaknesses or failures are detected and corrected
at the earliest opportunity.
2.1 The Purpose and Goal of PFMRP Phase IV
In its strategy document3 the purpose of PFMRP Phase IV is given as “strengthening and improving public financial management systems in a more coordinated manner [than previous phases4] in order to meet the current fiscal policy challenges”. In the strategy executive summary this is somewhat elaborated as being in support of MKUKUTA/MKUZA II and Vision 2025, with three key elements for PFMRP to achieve:
1. Fiscal sustainability and balance in the public economy;
2. Restructuring and reallocations for growth and poverty alleviation; and
3. Improved public sector performance, efficiency and effectiveness in public administration leading to improved service delivery and development results for Tanzanians.
In respect of these key elements we would expect the public financial management process to contribute as
follows:
A. For fiscal sustainability and balance in the public economy, the role of the public financial management
process is to provide appropriate revenue and expenditure mechanisms that control and maximise
revenue collection; control expenditure and secure the best value for money from such expenditure.
Policy decisions that need to be made to achieve sustainability and balance must be based upon
prompt, accurate and complete financial information provided by the public financial management
process.
B. For restructuring and reallocations for growth and poverty alleviation, the role of public financial
management is to provide the budget preparation, budget execution and review processes that control
the allocation and use of resources consistent with the authorisation of Parliament. In order for
management activity to be effective in securing appropriate restructuring and reallocations, the public
financial management process must provide the appropriate prompt, accurate and complete financial
information.
C. For improved public sector performance in service delivery and development, the role of the public
financial management process is to combine aspects of budget preparation, budget execution and
review to facilitate the execution of policies and activities for improvement in service delivery and
execution. In particular, the public financial management process should control the allocation,
movement and disposal of financial resources utilised in service delivery and development and
importantly provide the appropriate prompt, accurate and complete financial information to show that the
service delivery and development is taking place.
2.2 Scope and Coverage of PFMRP
There are six key result areas in PFMRP Phase IV with outputs, targets and milestones. They are:
KRA 1 Revenue management: Strengthened systems, processes and procedures for improving the
operational capability of the revenue collection by June 2016.
KRA 2 Budgeting and planning: Strengthened capacity of planning and budget management,
including results and program based budgeting, within MOF, MDAs and LGAs by June 2016.
KRA 3 Budget execution, accountability and transparency: Improved utilization of public resources
in a more effective, efficient and transparent manner by June 2016.
3Public Financial Management Reform Programme Strategy Phase IV, 2012/13 - 2016/17, Volume I 4 Author’s assumption based on previous reviews of PFMRP phases.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 5 | P a g e
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight: Improved adherence and enforcing of MDAs and LGAs to
financial internal controls, rules, laws, regulations and audit recommendations by June 2016.
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management: Improved management practices with
increased accountability and leadership to better manage performance of PFMRP.
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub Programme.
2.2.1 Key result areas and overall purpose and goals
The first consideration is how well these key result areas correspond with the overall purpose and goals of
PFMRP Phase IV. KRA 1, revenue management, should be a major contributor to fiscal sustainability and
balance in the public economy. It should also contribute to growth and poverty alleviation and improve the
resource availability for service delivery and development.
Both KRA 2, budgeting and planning, and KRA 3, budget execution should contribute effectively to all three
key elements described in section 2.1. One would expect these reform areas to contribute to growth and poverty
alleviation by securing a better allocation of resources in the budget preparation process. This key element
should also be improved through the better control over the usage of funds in the process of budget execution.
These changes should in turn lead to improved performance, facilitating better service delivery and development.
KRA 4, budget control and oversight, by its title should be closely aligned with both budget execution and
review processes. This alignment should lead to this KRA contributing to growth, poverty alleviation, and
performance improvement in service delivery and development. An examination of the outputs in this key result
area shows that the majority are concerned with oversight and the review processes with little concerning budget
control in budget execution.
KRA 5, change management and programme management, from its title suggests that it is concerned with
facilitation of change and the management of the reform programme itself. This is not a key result area that one
would expect to make a direct contribution to the key elements in the goal and purpose of the reform. However a
closer examination of the content of the outputs within KRA 5 shows that it encompasses activities that are not
part of programme management but central to public financial management reform. The upgrading and roll-out
of IFMIS/EPICOR is a specific example.
Finally, there is KRA 6, the LGA Reform Sub Programme. This KRA has been added to the reform
programme in the last financial year. It should contribute across all three key elements in respect of local
government authorities. It recognises the difficulties associated with combining reform activities for central
government and local government together.
2.2.2 Key result areas addressing PEFA identified PFM weaknesses
The next consideration is the extent that the key result areas and anticipated outputs therein address the
weaknesses in public financial management that need to be included in a public financial management reform
programme. The first complication in attempting to undertake such an assessment is the mixing of both central
and local government targets in the outputs, milestones, and activities in the reform programme. The public
financial management processes for each are, or at least should be, separate. They have different legal
frameworks, oversight structures and complexities. This issue has somewhat been mitigated by the appropriate
creation of KRA 6 which deals with local government separately.
Taking central government alone one needs to know what the current weaknesses, if any, are in the public
financial management process. An obvious starting point for that is the latest Public Expenditure and Financial
Accountability (PEFA) Assessment. This assessment, whilst it may not precisely reflect local issues and
priorities is internationally recognised as an important indicator of weaknesses in a country’s public financial
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 6 | P a g e
management processes. The 2013 PEFA Assessment cited the following performance indicators as having a C
or D where a C indicates a significant departure from good practice and a D indicates a major departure from or
lack of good practice. The following table gives those performance indicators and shows, by way of key result
indicator and output references, where in the reform programme those weaknesses are potentially addressed:
Table 1 PEFA PIs with Significant Departures from Good Practice
Performance Indicator 2013 PEFA
Score PEFA Comment5 KRA/output reference
PI-2 Composition of expenditure
outturn compared to
original approved budget
D+ The budget lacks credibility KRA output 2.2 specifically
targets this PI. KRA output
2.1 should also contribute
to improvement for this PI.
PI-3 Aggregate revenue outturn
compared to original
approved budget
C Revenue generation and
collection insufficiently effective.
KRA output 1.1 specifically
targets this PI.
PI-4 Stock and monitoring of
expenditure payment
arrears
C Arrears at an unacceptable
level showing a lack of
commitment control.
KRA output 3.2 could
contribute to improvement
for this PI but does not
directly address
commitment control.
PI-5 Extent of unreported
government operations
C+ A significant portion of
government operations is off-
budget and unreported
KRA outputs1.4 and 2.1
specifically target this PI.
PI-8 Transparency of inter-
governmental fiscal
relations
C+ Revenue and expenditure
consolidated data is not being
reported for general
government for sectoral
categories
KRA outputs6.2 and
6.3target this PI.
PI-9 Oversight of aggregate
fiscal risk from other public
sector entities
C There is insufficient oversight of
fiscal risk.
KRA output 4.4specifically
targets this PI.
PI-
12
Multi-year perspective in
fiscal planning, expenditure
and budgeting
C An appropriate multi-year
perspective is not in operation.
KRA output 2.2 should
contribute to improvement
for this PI.
PI-
14
Effectiveness of measures
for taxpayer registration
and tax assessment
C Insufficient measures to ensure
taxpayer registration and tax
assessment in place.
KRA output 1.2 could
contribute to improvement
for this PI but does not
directly address the
weaknesses.
5Based on the description of the score level from the PEFA Fieldguide, May 2012.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 7 | P a g e
Performance Indicator 2013 PEFA
Score PEFA Comment5 KRA/output reference
PI-
16
Predictability in availability
of funds for commitment of
expenditure
C A robust cash flow forecasting
system is not yet in place
KRA output 3.2 targets this
PI.
PI-
17
Recording and
management of cash
balances, debt and
guarantees
C There is insufficient
consolidation of the
government’s cash balances
KRA output 3.3specifically
targets this PI. KRA output
3.2 should also contribute
to improvement for this PI.
PI-
20
Effectiveness of internal
controls for non-salary
expenditure
D+ Commitment control systems
are generally lacking or they are
routinely violated. The core set
of rules for processing and
recording transactions are not
complied with on a routine and
widespread basis
KRA output 3.1 and to an
extent KRA output 4.6 in
respect of procurement
should partially contribute
to improvement for this PI.
PI-
22
Timeliness and regularity of
accounts reconciliation
D+ Bank reconciliation does not
meet the required standards
and reconciliation and
clearance of suspense
accounts is not satisfactory.
KRA output 6.6 specifically
targets this issue for LGAs
only. This may be
addressed indirectly by
improvements in internal
audit, KRA output 4.1
PI-
23
Availability of information
on resources received by
service delivery units
C Sufficient regularly reported
data is not available.
KRA output 5.1 in effect
targets this PI.
PI-
24
Quality and timeliness of
in-year budget reports
C+ There are some concerns about
the accuracy of information
KRA output 2.2 specifically
targets this PI.
PI-
26
Scope, nature and follow-
up of external audit
C+ The follow-up on audit
recommendations is
unsatisfactory
KRA output 4.2 specifically
targets this PI.
PI-
28
Legislative scrutiny of
external audit reports
D+ Scrutiny of audit reports is
extremely delayed if it happens
at all. Resultant
recommendations are largely
ignored by the executive.
KRA output 4.5 specifically
targets this PI.
From the above table, which reflects the PEFA assessment for central government, there are two main
performance areas that are not directly addressed by PFMRP IV. These unfortunately are frequently mentioned
by the NAOT as recurrent areas of poor performance. They are:
Effectiveness of internal controls for non-salary expenditure, where commitment control systems are
generally lacking or they are routinely violated and where the core set of rules for processing and
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 8 | P a g e
recording transactions are not complied with on a routine and widespread basis. This is only partially
addressed in the reform programme by targeting improvements in procurement controls.
Timeliness and regularity of accounts reconciliation, where the only direct interventions in the reform
programme are for local government authorities. The improvement of internal audit in central
government will only have an indirect and longer-term impact.
Both of these performance areas are critical in ensuring the probity of transactions and the completeness in
accounting. Significant fiduciary risk is introduced by deficiencies in these in particular since either can hide or
mask monetary malfeasance.
On the other hand one needs to consider the extent to which there are key result area outputs that are in areas
of public financial management that appear to be less critical. We identify the following activities as addressing
performance areas where the PEFA assessment indicates a less urgent need. They are presented in the
following table.
Table 2 KRA Outputs Addressing Less Critical PEFA Ratings
KRA output Comment
3.4 Improved integrity and content of government
financial statements and the migration from
IPSAS cash to IPSAS accrual accounting
forall government accounts is progressing in
accordance with plans.
The conversion from cash to accrual accounting is
driven by a decision to make the government accounts
IPSASB standards compliant. This is being
undertaken as a technical accounting exercise. It is
not taking advantage of the transition to improve the
budget preparation and execution processes.
3.5 Improved accountability in management of
government assets for supporting migration
to IPSAS accrual.
This output is largely driven by the decision to migrate
from a cash to an accrual basis of accounting.
4.1 Increased coverage and quality of the internal
audit functions
This output has an indirect impact on the improvement
of a range of public financial management processes
but in itself is not seen as critical. It could be argued
that the first year of spending by the reform
programme on internal audit has resulted in the
improvement. The improvement from a ‘C’ in 2010 to
a ‘B’ in 2013 appears to confirm this. The question is
whether a continuing level of support is appropriate. In
addition, internal audit functions should be sustained
through sustainable government budget structure.
4.7 HCMIS is entrenched in service delivery
points in selected sectors and its
sustainability attained
The 2013 PEFA PI-18 rating of ‘B’ suggests that this is
not a critical performance area. This is, however an
improvement of the ‘C+’ score of 2010. Again the
question is whether a continuing level of support is
appropriate.
5.1 Coordinate integration, interfacing and
rationalization of government financial
systems.
This output would appear to be concerned with the
integration of central government but in fact the
performance indicators suggest that it goes beyond
this. The output seeks the integration of central
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 9 | P a g e
KRA output Comment
government systems with local government
authorities. This is not a usual feature of nations with
devolved and distinct local government authorities.
5.2 Utilization of EPICOR modules Increased
from seven to ten
This output apparently requires the implementation of
multi-site management, replication server license and
advanced report designer modules in EPICOR. The
milestones do appear to match this requirement and
one is led to question its need and priority.
5.3 All software development and module
upgrades are coordinated with the
overarching plans for ICT integration
Software development and module upgrades should
form part of ongoing maintenance of any set of
financial applications. A reform programme ideally
should not be used to provide support for what should
be recurrent expenditure.
5.5 Coordination and standardization of PFM
training
No doubt this is a useful ambition but not a PEFA
assessment based requirement.
2.4 Quality and comprehensiveness of budget
documentation as well as public access to
key fiscal information
4.3 Improved transparency on audit reports
(central, local and parastatal levels) to
strengthen scrutiny and accountability
5.4 Improved communication and public access
to key fiscal information to stakeholders
All of these outputs are concerned with transparency
and public access to PFM related information. None
of these outputs are specifically required to respond to
significantly weak areas in the PEFA assessment.
This review recognises that there is merit in supporting improvements in all of the aspects of public financial
management supported in the previous table. We believe that the reform programme should actively identify
priorities. From our analysis we have been able to identify those reforms that we consider to be of a lower
priority. The risk is that in not identifying the priorities within the PFMRP structure an overview of the health of
public financial management generally may be lost in the width, complexity and ambition of the programme.
2.2.3 PFMRP IV addressing current PFM weaknesses
In order to assess how well PFMRP IV is addressing the required public financial management reforms in
Tanzania, a further analysis can be provided by considering the features of existing public financial management
that depart from good practice.
2.2.3.1 Consolidated Fund
A basic principle of public financial management for central government is that all monies from whatever source
are paid into a consolidated fund. Monies can only be withdrawn from that fund by act of the legislature and
utilised in accordance with legally binding conditions of control and management. At specified times and
particularly at the end of the financial year, the executive is required to report to the legislature on the authorised
use of those resources and the position of the balances that remain to ensure that funds have only been used for
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 10 | P a g e
authorised purposes. The statements that provide the detail for this report are independently reviewed, assessed
and reported on by the supreme audit institution.
Therefore, one would expect to find a set of financial statements for the Consolidated Fund that compare the
authorised budget with the actual performance and account for the receipt, disposal and disposition all of the
government monies received into the Consolidated Fund. This would require bringing together the transactions
relating to all of the monies that are considered to remain within the Consolidate Fund i.e. those funds, which if
they are unspent at the financial year end, need to be returned or more specifically monies where the legislature
has not enacted some provision whereby the monies can be retained separately. By the production of these
statements the executive assures the legislature that monies received by the Consolidated Fund are fully
accounted for and that monies expended from the fund have only been in accordance with the legislature’s
authorisation. The relevant statements for the Consolidated Fund are those set out in Section 25 of the Public
Finance Act, Cap 348. We are not able to find statements in the 2013/14 Annual Financial Statements for the
Government of Tanzania that meet the Section 25 requirements. We are also unable to find any comments by
the Controller and Auditor General on their absence. In our view, the need to meet legal requirements comes
first. International standards are a secondary consideration.
The importance of this requirement to fully account for the Consolidated Fund can be illustrated by an
examination of the Budget for Fiscal Year 2013/14 April – June 2014 Full Year Budget Performance and
Economic Review report. In Annex A: Summary of Central Government Operations July -June 2014 there is a
presentation that should show how the central government budget has actually been implemented during the
financial year, i.e. a summary of the basic statement for the disposal of the Consolidated Fund during the
financial year.
The first obvious error is the inclusion of “LGAs own source” in the operations of central government. These
funds are not from central government operations and are not to be included in the Consolidated Fund. This is
the first indication that the statement is materially inaccurate. Further down the page is an item labelled
‘Expenditure Float’ for TZS 611 billion in 2013/14 and another labelled ‘Adjustment to cash & other items’ for a
further TZS 542 billion in 2013/14. The former is a balance established in Annex D and the latter is most
certainly a balancing figure for Annex A. This is evidenced by the fact that the Annex A figures for domestic
borrowing in 2013/14 are exactly the same as those for 2012/13, yet the statement is made to balance. If one
adjusts for the obvious errors i.e. LGA own revenue and the 2013/14 domestic borrowing figures, the
unexplained balance would be of the order of TZS 845 billion. This represents a failure to account for either,
26% of borrowing, 8% of revenue or 5% of expenditure. It should be noted that any changes in the basis of
accounting cannot explain such differences. Good practice would require that the budget and statements of
financial performance are prepared on the same basis.
We note that the Budget Act 2015 includes in Section 13.(2) ‘The Commissioner for Budget under the direction of
the Permanent Secretary shall be responsible for the preparation, execution, monitoring, evaluation and
reporting of the budget.’ The Commissioner for Budget cannot be given responsibility for the whole of the public
financial management cycle. This is certainly a significant departure from good public financial management
practice. There should be distinct separations in the responsibilities for each part. The execution of the budget
and subsequent reporting are primarily the responsibility of accounting officers. The support and overall co-
ordination of this activity should be with the Accountant General. In fact, the Commissioner for Budget should
only support the accounting officers in the preparation of their budgets, providing guidelines within which they
need to be prepared. The Commissioner for Budget should co-ordinate and supervise budget formulation.
We also note that Section 50 includes “(3) The Commissioner for Budget in collaboration with the Commissioner
for Policy Analysis shall, within the time prescribed in the regulations issue and publish quarterly a report on
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 11 | P a g e
budget execution.” In good practice of public financial management this would be the responsibility of the
Accountant General. The Accountant General should own the financial data for budget execution and have the
accounting expertise to assure its quality. The confusion that this provision introduces may be reflected in the
deficiencies previously noted in the Budget for Fiscal Year 2013/14 April – June 2014 Full Year Budget
Performance and Economic Review report.
The most important role of a country’s supreme audit institution is in providing an independent review for the
legislature of the annual financial statements presented by the executive, in particular in forming an opinion on
their veracity and legal compliance. The Controller and Auditor General’s report on the Consolidated Financial
Statements for the Year Ended 30th June 2014states that it is not possible to form an opinion on the statements
since they are a consolidation of accounts for entities that have differing accounting periods and policies i.e. they
do not comply with the relevant IPSASs. The opinion is silent as to how well the statements meet the legal
requirements.
2.2.3.2 Transition from cash to accrual
As noted in the previous section the transition from a cash basis to an accrual basis is being undertaken as a
technical accounting exercise. The major benefit for any public authority in undertaking such a transition is the
improvement in the allocation of resources through the identification of true costs. This translates into an
improvement in budget preparation and control. The most immediate benefits of the transition come through the
recognition of current assets and liabilities. This means that commitments and arrears are better controlled
through the recognition of expenditure at the time that goods and services are received. It also means that tax
and other revenue collections are better monitored through the proper identification of collection arrears and the
fuller identification of bad and doubtful debts and write-offs. This improved statement of financial performance
can only be utilised effectively if it is compared with a budget statement prepared on the same basis. Hence one
would expect any transition to accrual accounting to be accompanied by parallel changes in budget preparation.
Currently the transition from cash to accrual is confined to a technical accounting exercise. The basis for budget
preparation has not been changed.
Despite a herculean attempt to consolidate the accounts of all levels of government including both central and
local government on an accrual basis, the Consolidated Financial Statements for the Year Ended 30th June 2014
do not meet the basic public financial management requirement, particularly in respect of accounting for the
Consolidated Fund. It is recognised that the consolidated statements prepared for the financial year 2013/14
show that the Accountant General’s staff and the finance staff in many public entities have made huge efforts to
produce financial statements prepared on an appropriate and consistent basis. This provides evidence of the
success of the many IPSASs related training initiatives that have been undertaken by the reform programme.
This work provides a very strong platform from which to take the transition forward. The challenge is to transform
the other processes within the PFM cycle to secure the real benefits to resource utilisation that the transition from
cash based to accrual based financial management should generate.
When asked why the financial statements did not show comparative forecast budget figures on the same basis
for financial performance and financial position, the Accountant General and staff made two observations:
1. The production of outturn figures are the responsibility of the Commissioner for Budget; and
2. The IPSASs standards allow in the period of transition for the statements to be prepared on an accrual
basis whilst the budget is prepared on a cash basis.
In respect of the first statement, it is true that the Budget Act 2015 in Section 13.(2) states ‘The Commissioner for
Budget under the direction of the Permanent Secretary shall be responsible for the preparation, execution,
monitoring, evaluation and reporting of the budget.’ We have already noted that the wording of this section is a
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 12 | P a g e
departure from good PFM practice. Section 50 of the Act both places a responsibility on the Accountant General
in sub-section (1) to provide income and expenditure reports to the Permanent Secretary Treasury and for the
Commissioner for Budget to provide quarterly reports on budget execution in sub-section (3). The Budget Act is
silent as far as responsibility for the overall quality and assurance of financial reporting, which in our view should
be with the Accountant General. The legislation, as currently worded, is confusing and does not comply with
good practice.
The second statement is on the face of it correct. The IPSASs do allow for the budget and the financial
statements to be prepared on a different basis in a transitional period. However, the IPSASs for accrual
accounting also require additional statements to be included that make comparisons on the same basis for actual
performance and budget. The detailed wording of the IPSASs requiring these statements is given in Appendix 5
– IPSASs selected extracts.
2.2.3.3 Other public financial management legislation
A review of the public financial management related laws and regulations is not required by the terms of
reference for this mid-term review. However, in undertaking the review certain legal provisions have come to our
attention, which indicate a lack of attention to public financial management principles. We have already noted
some inappropriate provisions in the Budget Act. The Public Finance Act 2001 states that the purpose of this act
is to put in place ‘The effective control, management, and regulation of the collection and use of the finances of
the United Republic of Tanzania and for enhancing Parliamentary control and supervision of public funds and
resources’. It is an Act that provides control, management and regulatory measures. It is not a fiscal or revenue
raising instrument. Yet amendments to section 11 establishing the Consolidated Fund have been made which
are concerned with what is effectively a Consolidated Fund tax.
It would appear that the motivation for the tax is the failure of the arrangements made when establishing the
various Executive Agencies, Public Corporations, etc. to secure the appropriate returns on their investment to the
central government and hence the Consolidated Fund. The establishment of this tax should have been through
a separate Act that made it clear that it overrode any provisions under any other Act that created a separate fund
from the Consolidated Fund. From a practical revenue generation perspective one wonders how the disparate
entities each with their own supply, demand and cost positions can uniformly cope with a blanket tax of this
nature. No doubt this will have its associated bad and doubtful debt provision complications.
The latest draft of Chapter 290 the Local Government Finances Act shows that a similar situation is being
created by a lack of clarity concerning the distinction between public financial management principles for local
authorities and general revenue positions. Section 5 Sources of revenue of urban authorities includes, not as an
overriding principle but within a list of sources, the following text:
“(4) All revenues of an urban authority shall be paid into the general fund of the urban authority.
(5) Any receipt derived from any trade, industry, works, service or other undertaking carried on or owned by
a Urban Authority either in whole or in part may be paid into a separate fund to be maintained by the
Urban Authority for the purposes of the trade, industry, works, service or undertaking, as the case may
be, from which the receipt is derived.”
These PFM principles should be clearly and separately stated and indeed the conditions and restrictions placed
by the local authority on the creation of separate funds, with associated fiduciary risk, should be more clearly
articulated. It would be desirable for there to be separate local government public financial management and
financing legislation.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 13 | P a g e
2.3 Identification of Priorities
The establishment of priorities is not the integral part of the reform programme design that one might expect. It
would be useful for the programme to identify where its priorities lie in order for the programme to flexibly
respond to the demands on and availability of resources. This would also facilitate both the management and
assessment of qualitative rather than quantitative progress of the overall reforms.
This is addressed somewhat by the inclusion in joint supervision mission reports of ‘burning issues/quick wins for
the next period’. The Sep/Oct 2013 mission tabulated a number of outputs and milestones that were established
as burning issues/quick wins. In the following table we consider those outputs and milestones and the extent of
their subsequent achievement:
Table 3 Extent of Achievement of Burning Issues/Quick Wins
Burning Issue/Quick Win
Output
Milestones Extent of achievement
1.2 The Government improves efficiency in
domestic revenue mobilization both at the
policy and the administration levels by
updating legal instruments towards
international best practice
1.2.8
1.3.6
Achieved - VAT Act passed.
Achieved - LG Finances Act study.
2.1 Strengthened capacity of LGAs for
MTEF preparation by 2015
2.1.3 Delayed - Not yet rolled out to all MDAs let
alone LGAs.
2.2: Increased effective utilization of
planning and budgeting tools by 2016 -
increase budget credibility
2.2.9
2.2.10
Achieved - Revised budget calendar.
Not yet achieved – Review to establish potential
improvements in budget credibility has not been
under taken and is unscheduled.
2.4 Quality and comprehensiveness of
budget documentation as well as public
access to key fiscal information
2.4.1
2.4.2
2.4.3
Achieved - For the past three financial years.
Delayed - Ownership of milestone uncertain.
Delayed - Ownership of milestone uncertain.
3.1 Strengthened public sector
procurement by June 2015
3.1.2 Achieved – Public Procurement Regulations
published Dec 2013.
3.2 Strengthened capacity of MDAs, RSs
and LGAs in cash management by 2015
3.2.1
3.2.3
Partially achieved - Only MDA staff trained.
Achieved - Monthly payment arrears report.
3.3 Strengthened public debt management
capacity by 2015
3.3.6
3.3.7
3.3.8
Not yet achieved - Quarterly monitoring of
contingent liabilities not undertaken.
Not yet achieved - Annual monitoring of
guarantees not undertaken.
Achieved - Quarterly debt report produced.
4.1 Increased coverage and quality of the
internal audit functions by 2016
4.1.7
4.1.8
At risk - Computerised internal audit delayed.
On track - 48 technical audits have been
undertaken.
4.2 Strengthened external audit functions
by 2016
4.2.9 Achieved - Findings and recommendations
follow-up data base established.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 14 | P a g e
Burning Issue/Quick Win
Output
Milestones Extent of achievement
4.4 Improved performance of parastatals by
June 2016
4.4.4 Delayed - TR Bill is delayed. IMTC requires
international study tour results first.
5.1 Coordinate integration, interfacing and
rationalization of government financial
systems
5.1.3
5.1.4
Achieved - A costed action plan for integration
of financial IT software and architecture.
Not yet achieved - Action plan execution not yet
completed.
5.12 National systems and processes for
intergovernmental transfers to LGAs
streamlined and rationalized
5.12.4 Achieved – Action plan for intergovernmental
transfers processes rationalisation developed.
The extent of achievement given in the above table is taken from Appendix 6 – Progress in the PFMRP IV
Outputs. In this appendix we have examined the achievement of each milestone within each output within each
key result area. The table shows a wide variety of results. It indicates that the programme has not secured the
quick wins and addressed the burning issues that it targeted. This suggests that the programme should do more
to actively focus on its priorities.
2.4 The Key Result Areas, Outputs and the PFM cycle
It is a generally accepted principle that public financial management is a cycle which through appropriate legal
and institutional arrangements undertakes the planning, execution and review of public finance. The principle
activities under these parts of the cycle include:
Planning – Strategic direction, national development plans, medium-term fiscal frameworks, medium-
term expenditure frameworks, annual budgets and legislature budgetary oversight.
Execution – Fund releases, cash flow management, reallocations, procurement, revenue collection,
commitment, ordering, internal control, recording and accounting
Review – Monitoring and evaluation, management accounting, in-year budget reporting, financial
statements, internal audit, external audit and legislature oversight of accounts.
These various processes overlap and interface with each other. However, public financial management works
best when it is recognised that the major processes, their ownership and accountability to the legislature should
be as clear and separate as possible. Similarly, the PFMRP Phase IV should be organised to address, reform
and improve discrete parts of the cycle. This ensures ownership and tends to eliminate duplication.
The following table presents comments on the way which the key result areas in PFMRP IV are aligned with the
parts of the PFM cycle.
Table 4 Key Result Areas and the PFM Cycle
Key Result Area Comments
KRA 1 Revenue management
Strengthened systems, processes and
procedures for improving the
operational capability of the revenue
collection by June 2016
The wording suggests an improvement in revenue collection
processes is required (execution) but the PEFA PI-3
measurement and the milestones (1.1.1 & 2) target forecasting
(planning). The next 1.2.1 to 4 and 1.2.6 &7 target process
improvement (execution). Milestone 1.2.5 and all of Output 1.3
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 15 | P a g e
Key Result Area Comments
deal with local government which being under a distinct legal
and institutional PFM framework should have beenwith PMO-
RALG. Output 1.4 deals with bringing more development
partner funding into the exchequer system and affects the
performance of the whole PFM cycle and is not just a revenue
improvement initiative.
KRA 2 Budgeting and planning
Strengthened capacity of planning and
budget management, including results
and program based budgeting, within
MOF, MDAs and LGAs
The milestones and activities included under this KRA generally
target improvement in planning and budget processes for central
government. The exceptions are Milestone 2.1.6 and Output 2.3
which deal with local authorities and should have been with
PMO-RALG. The Output 2.4 was appropriately transferred from
KRA 5. The introduction of KRA 6 to deal exclusively with local
government has also been an appropriate change.
KRA 3 Budget Execution, Accountability
and Transparency
Improved utilization of public resources
in a more effective, efficient and
transparent manner
Output 3.1 for procurement and Output 3.2 for cash
management are both focussed on the execution part of the
PFM cycle. That is with the exception of local government cash
management improvement which should be co-ordinated by
PMO-RALG. However, Output 3.3 concerning debt management
should impact all parts of the PFM cycle as should Outputs 3.4
and 3.5 re transfer from cash to accrual accounting. The latter
two whilst obviously focussed on accounting for execution must
be compatible with budgeting in order to facilitate effective
subsequent review and oversight.
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight
Improved adherence and enforcing of
MDAs and LGAs to financial internal
controls, rules, laws, regulations and
audit recommendations
Strengthening internal and external audit (4.1, 4.2 and 4.3) are
certainly improvements in PFM review processes. Output 4.5
concerning the performance of the PAC is also a review and
oversight reform. Outputs 4.4 and 4.6 concerning PEs cut
across many individual entities’ PFM processes. As far as the
central PFM process is concerned the focus is on either or both
increasing the revenue available or expenditure commitment in
respect of those PEs throughout the PFM cycle. Output 4.7 re
HCMIS squarely targets the execution part of the PFM cycle.
KRA 5 Change Management and
Programme Management
Improved management practices with
increased accountability and leadership
to better manage performance of
PFMRP
From its description this KRA should be concerned with internal
PFMRP management practices. It is not. This KRA includes a
number of cross cutting initiatives. Outputs 5.1 and 5.12 concern
integrating MDA and LGA financial systems. This is the
intended integration of two separate levels of government with
PFM. Technically this should be only undertaken to meet the
need of generating compatible statistical data not as an
instrument for establishing central control and accountability.
LGAs are accountable to their electorate.
Output 5.2 concerns the utilisation of an increased number of
EPICOR modules. This targets budget execution and
subsequent accounting and reporting. This in turn fuels the
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 16 | P a g e
Key Result Area Comments
review part of the cycle and indeed the format and content of
planning and budgets. Output 5.4 concerns the improvement of
communication and public access to financial data throughout
the PFM cycle.
Output 5.13 for Zanzibar concerns the reform of a separate PFM
cycle and should be at the centre of a separately expanded
KRA.
The other outputs in this KRA concern internal PFMRP
management matters and should be addressed separately.
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub Programme This KRA addresses the LGAs’ PFM cycles that are separate
from that at the centre. This KRA within itself should be
organised such that the separate parts of the LGAs PFM cycle
are supported by the appropriate experts from the centre.
The analysis in this table when summarised indicates that the reform programme could be organised around the
key result areas below. Primarily this would emphasise appropriate ownership of the various parts of the cycle
and avoid some existing confusions as to responsibilities for some outputs and milestones.
A. Planning and budgeting – Tanzania does have a parliamentary standing committee which scrutinises
the budget, however, this is a recent development and therefore a lot still needs to be learned by the
way the committee works. In addition, Tanzania government does have a Commissioner for Budget
that directs the budget preparation. This office should be the focal point for all budget /planning
initiatives in the reform programme i.e. Outputs 1.1, 2.1, 2.2, and 2.4.
B. Budget execution –These outputs are concerned with expenditure management which is the
responsibility of individual accounting officers. The focal point for outputs 3.1, 3.2,4.7 and 5.12 would
be the Accountant General.
C. Review and scrutiny – These outputs can be logically split between two focal points. The Controller and
Auditor General would be the focal point for outputs 4.2, 4.3 and 4.5. The Internal Auditor General
would be the focal point for output 4.1.
D. Whole of PFM–The Deputy Secretary (PFM) should be the focal point for those outputs that need to be
at a level where their effects on all aspect of the PFM can be recognised, facilitated, coordinated and
controlled. They are:
a. Outputs 3.4 and 3.5 re the transition from a cash to accrual basis
b. Output 3.3 re debt management
c. Outputs 5.1, 5.2, and 5.3 dealing with cross-cutting IT initiatives
d. Output 5.4 re public access to fiscal information
e. Output 1.4 re DP funds and the exchequer system
E. Non-core PFM – The focal points for these reform initiatives should be:
a. Outputs 4.4 and 4.6 re improved performance of PEs – Treasury Registrar as focal point
b. Outputs 5.5 re PFM training – Director of Administration and Human Resource Management
MoF as focal point.
F. Local government authorities – Outputs 1.3, 2.3 and parts of others together with all of KRA 6 are
concerned with local government authorities for which the PMO-RALG should provide the focal point.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 17 | P a g e
G. Zanzibar – h Output 5.13 for Zanzibar needs to be fleshed out to identify the core PFM initiatives and
focal points for the reform of Zanzibar’s own PFM processes.
H. PFRMRP management - Outputs 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 5.10 and 5.11are all concerned with programme
execution. The focal point for these should be the Programme Manager, the Director Planning Division.
When undertaking this mid-term review we have found a number of instances where the ownership for the
execution of a particular milestone is unclear. This is shown in our detailed evaluation in Appendix 6 – Progress
in the PFMRP IV Outputs. Examples of such confusion can be found for several milestones including 2.2.8,
2.4.2, 2.4.3, 3.1.1, 3.4.1, 3.4.12, 5.5.2, 5.10.1aand 5.10.2. The relationships between milestone and component
manager have not been clearly established and are not part of the M&E framework as they should be. Part of
the problem results from the design of the reform programme not being focussed on the PFM cycle. This results
in component managers having responsibilities for diverse parts of key result areas as shown in the following
table.
Table 5 Key Result Areas and Component Managers
Component Manager Key Result Area 1 2 3 4 5 6
Accountant General x x x
DAHRM x
Policy Analysis x x
PMO-RALG x x x x
External Finance x
Commissioner for Budget x x
Public Procurement Policy Department x
Government Asset Management x
Internal Auditor General x x
National Audit Office x
Treasury Registrar Office x
Public Procurement Regulatory Authority x x
PO-Public Service Management x
PO-Planning Commission x
Financial Information Systems Management x
Government Communication Unit x
Planning Division x x
Zanzibar x
Regional Administration Secretariats x
2.5 The nature of the PFMRP outputs and milestones
In the following section we consider the following challenges to any reform programme. The reform programme
should be designed such that:
The outputs relate to the key result area.
The milestones relate to the outputs.
Milestones or achievement measurements relate to outputs and outcomes rather than inputs.
The inter-dependencies and linkages between outputs and milestones are established.
The programme funding supports reform and sustainability rather than providing recurrent funding.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 18 | P a g e
2.5.1 Outputs relative to their key result areas
The best design of a reform programme is where the outputs fully support the key result areas. A review of the
reform programme’s content suggests that there are areas where the planned output does not fully match the
key result area within which it is included. This is shown in the following table.
Table 6 Key Result Area and Output Mismatches
Key Result Area Mismatched output Comments
KRA 1 Revenue Management:
Strengthened systems, processes and procedures for improving the operational capability of the revenue collection by June 2016
1.4: Increase of donor funding that flows through the exchequer system by 2016
This is not an output related solely to revenue. The output refers to both revenue and expenditure and should engage the complete PFM cycle.
KRA 2 Budgeting and planning:
Strengthened capacity of planning and budget management, including results and program based budgeting, within MOF, MDAs and LGAs by June 2016.
None All outputs for this KRA are appropriate.
KRA 3 Budget Execution, Accountability and Transparency:
Improved utilization of public resources in a more effective, efficient and transparent manner by June 2016
3.3: Strengthened public debt management capacity by 2015
Whilst public debt is probably most closely associated with budget execution, it is also closely aligned with overall fiscal planning and performance throughout the PFM cycle.
3.4: Improved integrity and content of government financial statements and the migration from IPSAS cash to IPSAS accrual accounting for all government accounts is progressing in accordance with plans.
Superficially this migration is an accounting exercise that is centred on the budget execution process. This should, however, be a PFM cycle wide initiative so that the real benefits of a transition to accrual accounting impact all of PFM.
3.5: Improved accountability in management of Government Assets for supporting migration to IPSAS Accrual
Similarly to 3.4 this output should be considered as part of the transition process.
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight:
Improved adherence and enforcing of MDAs and LGAs to financial internal controls, rules, laws, regulations and audit recommendations by June 2016
4.4: Improved performance of parastatals by June 2016.
The proper control of parastatals impacts all parts of the PFM cycle. Funding demands from parastatals directly affect both budget credibility and budget execution. Their performance and presentation of contingent liabilities are important factors to be taken into account in the review process.
4.6: Improved public procurement performance by PEs by 2015
4.7: HCMIS is entrenched in service delivery points in selected
This is a budget execution output that should be included in a KRA
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 19 | P a g e
Key Result Area Mismatched output Comments
sectors and its sustainability attained
that is focussed on that part of the PFM cycle.
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management:
Improved management practices with increased accountability and leadership to better manage performance of PFMRP
5.1: Coordinate integration, interfacing and rationalization of government financial systems.
These outputs are not directly related to change and programme management. They are all initiatives concerning cross-cutting processes that impact the whole of the PFM cycle. They should be separated from this key result area.
5.2: Utilization of EPICOR modules Increased from seven to ten
5.3: All software development and module upgrades are coordinated with the overarching plans for ICT integration.
5.4: Improved communication and public access to key fiscal information to stakeholders
5.5: Coordination and Standardization of PFM Training Achieved.
5.12: National systems and processes for intergovernmental transfers to LGAs streamlined and rationalized.
This is not a programme management issue. It is concerned with budget execution and should be grouped with the outputs in that part of the PFM cycle.
5.13: Strengthened Public Financial Management Reforms in Zanzibar by 2016
This again is not a programme management issue. It should have its own key result area with outputs focussed on the parts of Zanzibar’s PFM cycle.
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub Programme
None All outputs for this KRA are appropriate.
2.5.2 Milestones relative to their outputs
In by far the majority of cases the milestones established are appropriately supportive of their relevant output.
There are few exceptions however that are highlighted in the next table.
Table 7 Output and Milestone Mismatches
Output Mismatched milestone Comments
4.2: Strengthened External audit functions by 2016
4.2.6. Closing of books of accounts for parastatals harmonized and audit modalities agreed by 2016
This milestone does not relate to strengthening external audit functions. It should be more correctly associated with 4.4 re performance of parastatals.
5.2: Utilization of EPICOR modules Increased from seven to ten [The new modules are:
5.2.1. EPICOR system upgrade completed by December 2014
The achievement of these milestones and the activities thereunder have related to the
5.2.2. ACGEN staff capacity
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 20 | P a g e
Output Mismatched milestone Comments
Multi-Site Management; Replication Server License; and Advanced Financial Report Designer].
enhanced by December 2014 upgrade to version 9.5 of EPICOR and associated training rather than the implementation of the three new modules.
5.2.3. Training for IFMS end users on the upgraded modules conducted by December 2014.
5.5: Coordination and standardisation of PFM training achieved
5.5.1. Training mapping exercise completed by December 2012
This mapping exercise established the training that had not been undertaken but had been planned to be undertaken. This does not contribute to coordination or standardisation. The first step is to establish the training needs so that the opportunities for coordination and standardisation are presented.
5.5.2. Capacity building plan developed and result measurement framework shared with key stakeholders by Feb 2014
A capacity building plan may contribute to coordination by establishing what is needed where but this should be preceded by a needs assessment to identify common skill gaps that can be targeted by coordinated and standardised training.
5.5.3. An impact assessment of PFM training is conducted to measure staff performance following various trainings by June 2015
An impact assessment may only be a measure of quality or relevance of training rather than demonstrating achievement of appropriate coordination and standardisation.
2.5.3 Outputs and outcomes versus inputs
The following table of data extracted from Appendix 6 – Progress in the PFMRP IV Outputs, shows the numbers
and percentages of milestones that are considered by the review to be measurable or unmeasurable and relate
to an output or input. An output milestone is considered to be one that has a direct effect on the higher level
strategic plan output, whereas an input milestone makes an indirect contribution. A measurable output is the
optimal condition for a milestone in achieving the higher level strategic plan output.
Table 8 Categories of Milestones
Milestone Category
Inputs Outputs
Measurable Unmeasurable Measurable Unmeasurable
Number 79 30 58 10
% of Total Milestones
45% 17% 33% 6%
This table shows that 23% of the milestones established are considered by the review as lacking the specificity
for them to be measured in order to demonstrate full achievement. It also shows that 62% of the milestones
relate to a measurement of an input rather than an output.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 21 | P a g e
2.5.4 Linkages and dependencies
It is important for the successful implementation of any reform programme to identify the linkages between
milestones and the dependency that any milestone may have on the completion of one or more others. In
PFMRP IV there are a number of examples where interdependencies should have been identified. This lack of
identification has led to situations where in supervision and progress reports milestones have been measured as
‘on track’ when in fact they have not been started, since they are dependent upon the completion of a previous
milestone.
An example of where dependencies have not been expressed and the adverse effect on reform programme
management concerns Output 3.1: Strengthened public sector procurement by June 2015. In Output 3.1 the
milestones 3.1.11 through to 3.1.17 are an interdependent sequence of milestones that in turn require the
completion of a national procurement policy in milestone 3.1.7. In the Joint Supervision Mission of September
2013 whilst it was noted that 3.1.7 was delayed the other seven milestones were considered to be ‘on track’. In
the December 2014 Annual Progress Report 3.1.7 is still shown to be delayed but yet again four of the seven
milestones are either ‘on track’ or not reported. The latter is generally taken to mean achieved. All of these
milestones must be regarded as either ‘delayed’ or ‘at risk’. The latter meaning that whilst the deadline has yet
to be passed the timely achievement of the milestone is at risk.
2.5.5 A reform programme or a funding programme
When meeting with component managers and discussing the support that they receive from PFMRP IV and the
extent to which they have been able to achieve the intended milestones we have noted that in a large number of
cases the activities that are being funded are activities that, given adequate resources, the Government of
Tanzania itself should be funding on a recurrent basis. Specific examples are the Internal Auditor General’s
office, where more than 50% of the internal audit activity is funded from PFMRP IV, and similarly more than 70%
of the procurement audits being carried out by the PPRA are funded from the programme. One can understand
a reform programme funding the introduction of these types of activity but to become a true reform programme
the steps taken within the reform should include the implementation of strategies to make these activities
sustainable within the government.
2.6 An assessment of progress against the PFMRP IV planned intermediate results
In the Public Financial Management Reform Programme Strategy Phase IV 2012/13 - 2016/17 the planned
intermediate results are set out. The review has undertaken a detailed assessment of progress against the
PFMRP IV planned milestones as included in the PFMRP IV Strategy document, volume 1 as updated by the
latest documentation. The detailed findings of the review in this respect are given in Appendix 6 – Progress in
the PFMRP IV Outputs.
One would expect a detailed review of the status of the achievement of the milestones, outputs and key result
areas to contribute directly to an assessment and understanding of the extent of achievement of a set of planned
interim results. This is unfortunately not the case. The planned intermediate results are a list of overall
aspirations. They lack specificity, are overly complex, do not have any baseline measurement and are in fact
largely unmeasurable.
However, based on our field work, our detailed analysis and overall understanding of the status of PFM in the
Government of Tanzania we make comments on the achievement of these ‘planned intermediate results’ in the
following table:
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 22 | P a g e
Table 9 Achievement of Planned Intermediate Results
Planned intermediate result Comment on achievement
i) Coordinated, comprehensive PFMRP effectively sequenced and supported by a consistent and harmonised legal and institutional framework;
There is some confusion in this planned result. The topic is probably the legal and institutional framework for PFM rather than PFMRP. There has been a number of new pieces of legislation:
Value Added Tax Act 2014
Budget Act 2014
Oil and Gas Revenue Management Act(Bill)
Public Finance Act amendment 2010
Public Procurement Act amendment 2011
Tax Administration Act 2014
This review, however, cites a number of examples where the principles of good practice for PFM are being confused and eroded by the content of some of the legislation in the above list.
ii) Utilisation of sound and comprehensive macroeconomic analysis, macro fiscal forecasting for a credible and transparent budget process and utilisation of MTFF.
The main area of reform in this area has been the work that is still ongoing to introduce programme based budgeting. A clear budget process and timetable has been established by the new Budget Act. Budget reallocation reports are published regularly. There is improved transparency in the budget process. The official budget manual is delayed awaiting formal approval. The actual impact of these changes on the actual measurements of variations of budget compared to actual have yet to be measured by an updated PEFA.
iii) Realistic revenue forecasting, collection and management;
Changes to and adoption of relevant legislation has been made and training has been delivered. Again the actual improvement in the accuracy of forecasting will be established by the next PEFA.
iv) Enhanced accuracy in forecasting and reporting of domestic and external cash resources;
Measures have been introduced reducing the number of bank accounts operated by LGAs. Training has been given to MDAs and LGAs on cash management. This has yet to be translated into a firm track record of cash management in practice.
v) Improved reporting and corrective action to enhance quality and completeness of report on financial statements and audits; cash and debt management;
Progress is being made in public debt management. The Public Debt Management Department has not yet been established but is expected soon. Monitoring of contingent liabilities has been delayed. Great strides in preparing financial statements on an IPSASs accrual basis are somewhat offset by the absence of both statutory financial statements and comparisons of outturns with budget. The Internal Auditor General’s office has been given training and funding for its activities. Similarly, the National Audit Office has received funding for training and some of its activities. The major risk that the NAOT faces is the reduction in its independence resulting from the new budget approval provisions in the Budget Act and the continued reliance on POPSM approvals for audit staff recruitment. There is now fear by NAO that, the office runs that risk of being reclassified below AFROSAI-E level three following some of the recent steps to curtail NAO independence.
vi) Establishment of a clear sequenced and coordinated
All of these ‘high impact’ agencies and initiatives have been receiving support through the reform programme. They all have been making
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 23 | P a g e
Planned intermediate result Comment on achievement
roadmap for support and implementation of “high impact” implementing agencies and initiatives such as program-based budgeting, Internal Audit, DFMIS, Treasury Registrar, ACGEN, PMORALG and Revenue management;
progress. However, a clear sequenced and coordinated roadmap has not been established. An example of this is the transition from cash to accrual accounting. The main objective of this exercise is to establish the true costs of service delivery which in turn should improve the credibility and accuracy of budgeting. Transformations of the budgeting and accounting processes need to go hand in hand. A clear sequenced and coordinated roadmap is required.
vii) A global performance and monitoring framework and establishing of strong linkages between policy objectives and public expenditure by means of sector-led MTEF and costed strategic plans; and
We are unclear as to what this planned result intends. Assuming we are talking about PFM rather than PFMRP, then the global performance and monitoring framework is established by the PFM cycle itself through budgeting, accounting, reporting and review. There are many aspects of the PFMRP that are direct improvement initiatives in these areas. In respect of a sector focussed MTEF and strategic plans, the main initiatives in the PFMRP concerned programme based budgeting.
viii) Institutional and Standardized training modules established where relevant.
This anticipated interim result does not appear to be supported by the appropriate milestones within the reform programme. The coordination and standardisation initiative are confined to a mapping exercise, uncoordinated capacity building plans and impact assessments. There are no apparent actions to standardise and coordinate training activity.
2.7 An analysis of the contribution, by output and milestone, to progress in achieving the
outputs and general goals of the programme
2.7.1 Progress in achieving the higher outputs and general goals by output and milestone
In section 2.2Scope and Coverage of PFMRPwe have already examined how well the key result areas address
the programme’s higher level outputs and goals. We concluded that:
The key result areas could be more closely aligned with the parts of the PFM cycle.
There could be a more effective separation between the PFM cycles in the various levels of
government. Whilst significant progress has been made in separating local government initiatives.
The key result areas generally support the higher level outputs and goals.
In order to assess the progress in achieving the higher level outputs and general goals of the programme the
next step is to consider the extent within key result areas that milestones are progressing and being achieved.
This is undertaken in the detailed examination shown in Appendix 6 – Progress in the PFMRP IV Outputs. This
in turn is evaluated as a percentage of completion in Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for
key result areas, outputs and milestones. The following table gives a high level summary and indicates that
overall the reform programme is making a reasonable level of progress.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 24 | P a g e
Table 10 Summary of milestone achievement
% Achieved# of
Milestones
% of
Milestones
0 57 30.5%
10 1 0.5%
25 8 4.3%
30 2 1.1%
50 20 10.7%
60 6 3.2%
70 5 2.7%
75 2 1.1%
80 3 1.6%
85 1 0.5%
90 3 1.6%
95 11 5.9%
100 68 36.4%
2.7.2 Sequencing of activities and value for money
An important consideration in establishing any reform programme is the sequencing of activities. Any
inappropriate sequencing can severely impair the impact of an activity and affect its achievement of value for
money. Whilst as previously noted we observed that the dependencies and linkages that we would expect to
find in a programme of reform were not established, we have found no significant instances where the
milestones have been inappropriately sequenced leading to waste. The one possible notable exception is in
respect of the milestones undertaken in the transition from cash to accrual accounting. The steps that have been
taken could be argued to be in the appropriate sequence but it is our belief that these steps do not include
actions and activities in respect of budgetary control over revenue collection arrears and payment arrears that
good practice requires. This means that milestones related to the valuation of fixed assets, for example, are in
our opinion out of sequence. It is almost certain that by the time that these valuations are considered for use in
the identification of true costs in planning the allocation of resources, the valuations will be out of date and
require revision. Hence these activities are in fact poor value for money. They should appear later in the
transition and thus avoid duplication of cost.
Assessment of value for money has been a major challenge for the review team. In order to effectively assess
value for money one needs to compare the cost of an initiative with the value of the impact of the outcome of that
initiative. Unfortunately, as has been mentioned elsewhere in this report there is little determination of
benchmarks and hence the expected value of the impact of an initiative. The review is hence restricted to
commenting on value for money failures where the inappropriate sequencing of initiatives definitely demonstrates
that value for money is at risk.
2.7.3 Choice of outputs, milestones and activities
In section 2.2Scope and Coverage of PFMRP we noted that whilst the key result areas and outputs relate to
PFM reform at both central and local government levels the choices of outputs, milestones and activities did not
sufficiently address two significant areas of weakness identified by PEFA, namely:
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 25 | P a g e
Effectiveness of internal controls for non-salary expenditure, where commitment control systems are
generally lacking or they are routinely violated and where the core set of rules for processing and
recording transactions are not complied with on a routine and widespread basis.
Timeliness and regularity of accounts reconciliation.
We also noted that a considerable part of the reform programme is in areas where PEFA believes the
performance deficiencies to be less critical. These initiatives are worthwhile in that they contribute to
improvement in PFM. However, they should only be considered as good choices if the critically deficient areas of
PFM are already being covered.
Further in sub-section 2.2.3PFMRP IV addressing current PFM weaknesses, we noted that during our review of
PFMRP initiatives and their outcomes certain deficiencies in PFM have been identified. These deficiencies are
mostly in areas supported by PFMRP IV. This does not mean that there are not issues elsewhere. Our review
has obviously mainly focussed on PFMRP IV supported areas unless specifically guided elsewhere by our terms
of reference. Therefore further choices of outputs, milestones and activities and tighter control over the quality of
execution of those chosen should have been made to ensure that the types of weakness in sub-section
2.2.3PFMRP IV addressing current PFM weaknessesdo not arise. The implications of the activities of the
PFMRP IV creating weaknesses in PFM are further discussed in section 3, Assessment of the factors affecting
progress and good implementation.
We also found instances in the reform programme where the choice of milestones and associated activities are
inconsistent with a reform programme. Mention has previously been made in sub-section 2.5.5 A reform
programme or a funding programme,of the need to ensure that initiatives create sustainable reform and do not
simply fund recurrent expenditure. The choice of such initiatives usually leads to failure once the funding is
withdrawn. Choosing to fund capital asset acquisition, such as acquiring or erecting a building, is equally if not
more incompatible with a reform programme. As an investment activity the acquisition of a capital asset should
not be considered a reforming activity. Indeed, it also requires future recurrent expenditure for the maintenance
and operation of the capital asset acquired. This again is not a reform activity. The size of the cost of such
investment can also skew the funding of a reform programme, as is the case for PFMRP IV. This is discussed in
section 2.10 An analysis of budget execution per key result area, component and source of funding.
2.8 Impact of Phase IV capacity building and studies
Mention has already been made in section 1.2Terms of Reference of the difficulties we faced in undertaking this
part of our revised terms of reference.
2.8.1 Impact of capacity building and training
In order to assess the impact of capacity building and training one needs to have identified and measured
benchmarks in the performance areas targeted by that training. Sometime after the training has been delivered
those benchmarks can be measured again and the impact of the training assessed. Unfortunately, such
benchmarks have neither been identified nor measured. This is a challenge that must be addressed by
programme management in the future. Whilst we are thus unable to make any specific assessments of impacts
from the many training initiatives funded by the programme we make impact related comments in the following
table for major training initiatives that should have been already completed:
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 26 | P a g e
Table 11 Training initiatives and comments on impact
Training initiative Comment on impact
2.2.2 Sixty MDAs, 21 RSs and 133 LGA trained in MTSPBM by Dec 2014
This training is delayed. The budget manual has not been officially approved hence training cannot take place. Percentage of MTEF budgets are meeting the MTSPBM standards is a good impact measure.
2.2.7. Phased training to MDAs, RSs and LGAs Budget Committees on resource prioritization and planning
Training of LGA committee members undertaken in Mar 2015.No training delivered to MDAs. Percentage reduction in deviation of actual expenditure from approved budget is not a good impact measure. Budget committees are more concerned with budget preparation than budget execution.
3.2.1. 600 staff of MDAs and LGAs trained on cash management using standardized materials by June 2015
346 MDA staff trained but zero LGA staff. Impact is difficult to assess since output 3.2 contains no output/outcome measure for cash management improvement.
3.3.3 Capacity of 50 Public Debt management staff enhanced to undertake DSA on external, domestic debt and contingent liabilities by June 2014.
There has been no activity on this milestone. The output does contain output measurements that could determine impact once the delayed training has taken place.
3.4.2 Training to the MDAs, RSs and LGAs accounting officers to develop awareness on IPSAS Accrual by June 2014
The production of the 2013/14 consolidated statements on an accrual basis indicates the positive impact of this training.
3.4.3 Capacity building to 250 staff from MDAS and RSs and Embassies to enhance skills in IPSAS accrual by 2014
Again the production of the 2013/14 consolidated statements on an accrual basis indicates the positive impact of this training.
3.4.6. 250 government accountants in MDAs /LGAs trained in IPSAS accrual and accrual modules for Epicor by September 2013
We have rated this milestone as not having been achieved since there is no evidence of expenditure on this training and no evidence was made available of the training having taken place. Despite this the 2013/14 consolidated statements in accrual basis were produced.
4.1.10. 550 internal auditors and other stakeholders trained in risk management process and risk based audit by June, 2016
This training target has already been achieved in advance of the target date. The output measure in the M&E framework is the number of trained staff. This certainly is not a measurement on which to base an assessment of impact.
4.2.3. 300 Auditors trained on Risk Based Audit and 200 in IT audit by 2014
This milestone is delayed and incomplete. Only 200 auditors have been trained on risk based audit. Again the output measure in the M&E framework is the number of trained staff. This certainly is not a measurement on which to base an assessment of impact.
4.2.10. 600 Auditors trained on audit commanding language (ACL) and other audit based software by 2014.
This milestone is delayed and incomplete. Only 400 auditors have been trained on ACL. Again the output measure in the M&E framework is the number of trained staff. This certainly is not a measurement on which to base an assessment of impact.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 27 | P a g e
Training initiative Comment on impact
5.2.2. ACGEN staff capacity enhanced by December 2014
ACGEN trained 381 users on new version of EPICOR in FY 2014/15. This appears to have had a positive impact, the upgraded version 9 is in place and working.
6.1.3 PMO - RALG staff and Finance Management Officers at RS to be trained in tax revenue plans and budgets to spearhead LGAs tax reviews and reforms. June 2014
Training was undertaken by Mzumbe University, Aug 2014. The required impact, albeit an indirect one, is an increase in LGA own source revenue as a percentage of GDP. This impact has yet to be measured.
2.8.2 Impact of studies
In order to assess the impact of the various studies undertaken as part of PFMRP IV one needs to have
identified and measured benchmarks in the performance areas targeted by these studies. Sometime after each
study has been delivered and the steps taken to implement the outcomes those benchmarks can be measured
again and the impact of each study assessed. Unfortunately, such benchmarks have neither been identified nor
measured. This is a challenge that must be addressed by programme management in the future.
Ten studies were included in the revised terms of reference on which we were asked to make impact
assessments. Only five reports have been given to the team for review. In the following table we make
comments on the impact of those studies.
Table 12 Studies and comments on impact.
Study Comment on impact
A study on local government authorities (LGAs) “own-source” revenue collection
The final report of this study is very comprehensive and provides many good recommendations that should have a positive impact. We particularly note the clarity of distinction between local and central government revenue collections.
Study on integration and harmonisation of MDAs revenue collection systems
This study produces a good report with useful recommendations which if implemented would appear to have a positive impact. It is interesting to note that in the report a 2009 study report is mentioned which provided many of the recommendations made in this 2013 report. This highlights that impact is only achieved where studies result in actual steps of implementation.
A study on mapping of transfer of funds to LGAs
The Sep 2013 output of this study is a good report with concise recommendations based on clear facts. This provides a very good base for both the revisions to the “LGDG System Implementation and Operations Guide”, and the “LDGD Annual Assessment Manual” issued in Nov 2014.
Mapping, modelling and simulation on Government of Tanzania financial management systems
This study results in a less well prepared report. It documents a number of systems but we believe that this information was readily available. The report does not address the central question for us i.e. What data needs to be shared and by whom? It assumes that an EIA is the way forward without exploring the variety of other options that should be considered. It is of no surprise that no further steps have been taken pursuant to this report.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 28 | P a g e
Study Comment on impact
2013 Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) Assessment Mainland Tanzania (Central Government)
This study, or more strictly speaking assessment, is most certainly very important to the Government of Tanzania in its oversight of its PFM. It is prepared consistently across nations to identify where the various levels of strength and weakness are in the 28 government performance measurement areas. We have used it previously in this review in sub-section 2.2.2Key result areas addressing PEFA identified PFM weaknesses to compare key result areas and high level outputs with critical weaknesses in PFM identified by PEFA. PFMRP IV has rightly used improvements in specific PEFA score as evidence of achievement.
PEFA reports are subject to PEFA Secretariat scrutiny and quality control. Whilst the PEFA report is no doubt a very important source of critical assessment it is worth noting that the 2013 assessment lists 11 out of the total 28 performance indicators that it believes were incorrectly scored in the 2009 assessment. This is a significant margin of error and highlights the need for overall PFM expertise to be used in the interpretation of results and their impact on the choice of reform activities and priorities.
2.9 An analysis of budget execution per key result area, output and milestone
As appendices we offer the following detailed analyses of financial performance:
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones.
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones.
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditurefor key result areas, outputs and milestones.
In summary for the whole reform programme the comparisons between budgets, releases and actual expenditure
are shown in the following table:
Table 13 PFMRP IV comparison of budget, releases and actual expenditure
(TZS 000s) 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Budget 33,518,000 46,398,322 37,056,265
Releases 23,427,995 29,128,053 14,518,292
Actual Expenditure 17,258,339 18,916,905 5,659,940
The actual expenditure for 2014-15 in the above table and appendices 6 and 8 mostly only captures the first
quarter expenditure of the budget period. The PFMRP Secretariat only includes data and makes follow-ups
when they receive reports from the component managers. The secretariat does not have access to real time data
from the IFMIS. It is our view that the releases and expenditure therefore in the 2014/15 data probably only
includes that reported as at December 2014.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 29 | P a g e
In summary the variances for each KRA and the whole reform programme are shown in the following tables:
Table 14 Variance between budget and actual expenditure
Key Result Area 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 1 Revenue Management -58% -42% -87%
KRA 2 Budgeting and Planning -91% -83% -100%
KRA 3 Budget Execution, Accountability and Transparency
-79% -61% -80%
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight -28% -64% -73%
KRA 5 Change Management & Programme Management
-56% -44% -96%
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub-Programme -57% -77%
Whole PFMRP IV -49% -59% -85%
Table 15 Variance between budget and releases
Key Result Area 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 1 Revenue Management -44% -14% -60%
KRA 2 Budgeting and Planning -58% -47% -79%
KRA 3 Budget Execution, Accountability and Transparency
-41% -28% -54%
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight -18% -47% -50%
KRA 5 Change Management & Programme Management
-36% -21% -73%
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub-Programme 0% -43%
Whole PFMRP IV -30% -37% -61%
Table 16 Variance between releases and actual expenditure
Key Result Area 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 1 Revenue Management -25% -33% -67%
KRA 2 Budgeting and Planning -79% -67% -100%
KRA 3 Budget Execution, Accountability and Transparency
-65% -47% -57%
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight -12% -32% -46%
KRA 5 Change Management & Programme Management
-31% -28% -83%
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub-Programme -57% -60%
Whole PFMRP IV -26% -35% -61%
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 30 | P a g e
Whilst we have major reservations over the accuracy of the 2014-15 figures in the previous tables of variances,
the data does show that there is a continuing and consistent under release and under spend on all reform
programme activities. This is no doubt a reflection on the way that development activities and funding are
administered. Current GoT rules and regulations do not distinguish between the budgetary control exercised
over development and recurrent activities even though the natures of the two activities are obviously different. A
major difference is in procurement. For development the procurement period and the length of time over which a
contract is executed is often extended. The expiry of funding at the end of a financial year is problematic. There
are mechanisms that can be employed that will allow warrants not to elapse or other carry-over arrangements
that can allow development funding not to be lost at the end of financial year. It would probably be very
beneficial for PFMRP to examine this issue in the future.
2.10 An analysis of budget execution per key result area, component and source of funding
This analysis is presented in Appendix 10 – Finances for components by source. There is evidence of extensive
under release or late release of funds both by GoT and the development partners. For GCU, in 2013/14 financial
year, they received a portion of their funds some two days prior to the close of the financial year implying that
although the money was marked as released it could never be used. The financial year closed before any
activities could be undertaken. Delay in funds has also been noted by several other stakeholders. It is among the
critical factors affecting use of released funds. The summary situation is shown in the following table of data
extracted from Appendix 10 – Finances for components by source.
Table 17 PFMRP IV budget, releases and expenditure to date
Budget
(TZS 000’s)
2012-to date
Funds Released (TZS 000’s)
2012-to date
Expenditure
(TZS 000’s)
2012-to date
Total for PFMRP IV 128,067,753 72,732,259 45,476,446
Total Government of Tanzania Contribution 61,308,415 19,549,837 17,517,405
Total Development Partner Contribution 66,759,338 53,182,422 27,959,041
This table illustrates the critical situation where only 36% of budgeted expenditure has actually been undertaken.
This appears to contradict the observation we made previously in sub-section 2.7.1Progress in achieving the
higher outputs and general goals by output and milestone, where we stated that it appears that the reform
programme is making a reasonable level of progress. This can surely not be the case when the reform
programme is so dramatically underfunded. By way of explanation we make the following comments in addition
to our previous observation that the 2014-15 expenditure figures are incomplete:
In times of financial constraint less expensive alternatives may be identified. We did not find, however,
any specific evidence of this.
The budget may be overly generous. There are many instances where milestones have been
completed without the expenditure of the full budget. This could, of course, also be interpreted as
potential evidence of economies being found.
There are many instances where milestones have been achieved or are in progress where no funds
have been released. We take this as evidence of the ministries and departments of the component
managers having found internal resources to complete the milestones. This is good, positive evidence
of the successful mainstreaming and ownership of the reform programme.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 31 | P a g e
The above table does not show the extent that delays in development partner contribution releases contribute to
the failure to undertake expenditure, particularly procurement, when faced with tight end of the financial year
deadlines.
It is also important to note that of the GoTTZS19.5 billion release and TZS17.5 billion expenditure TZS11 billion
has been in respect of the provision of office accommodation i.e. TZS10 billion for the NAOT and TZS1 billion for
Accountant General zonal offices. We have previously mentioned that fixed asset acquisition is a form of
investment and not strictly a reform expenditure. Thus only 37% of the money (i.e. TZS 6.5 billion) released by
the GoT has been a true contribution to reform.
2.11 A broad review of the nature of activities financed by the PFMRP IV
There are a number of considerations:
1. The extent that PFMRP IV recognises and facilitates the priority PFM reforms. The definition of priority is
subjective. Therefore, as a starting point we will take the latest PEFA. The PEFA scores have been
recognised with the monitoring and evaluation framework of PFMRP IV as an important measure of the
success of the reforms. We found that, as previously described in sub-section 2.2.2Key result areas
addressing PEFA identified PFM weaknesses, whilst all key result areas and outputs can be generally
regarded as contributing to improvement of PFM there are differences in degree of appropriateness.
Outputs 1.1, 1.4, 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 4.2, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 5.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.6 all directly address
critical weaknesses identified by PEFA. The remainder do not. In fact, two critical weaknesses,
effectiveness of internal controls for non-salary expenditure, and timeliness and regularity of accounts
reconciliation, are not directly addressed by PFMRP IV.
2. As previously mentioned in sub-section 2.5.3Outputs and outcomes versus inputs the majority of
milestones identify an input to the reform rather than an associated output or outcome. It is this failure to
identify outputs and outcomes that has made it difficult for both the reform programme generally and this
review in particular to assess impact.
3. As indicated in the previous section, a major part of the GoT’s funding contribution has been taken up by
the acquisition of fixed assets. These should not have been chosen as reform activities.
4. We must highlight the need for activities included in the reform programme to be fully considered before
they are included. We have been unable to establish the clear objectives and resulting benefits that were
identified prior to the inclusion of the transition from a cash to an accrual basis of accounting in the
reform programme. We believe that the transition from cash to accrual should be undertaken to establish
a clearer understanding of the financial position so that real costs can be determined for the optimal
allocation of resources and so that expenditure and income is recognised at the time that goods or
services are received or delivered. This means that current assets and current liabilities are fully and
promptly identified ensuring that payment arrears and revenue/tax collection arrears are known and
controlled. This would make the transition from cash to accrual a truly reforming exercise rather than the
technical accounting exercise that it is currently.
5. There are those activities included in PFMRP IV which are funded from a reform programme when in fact
they are recurrent in nature. These activities should only be included in a reform programme when and
only when the reform includes a strategy for making the activity and the funding thereof sustainable. The
support to the Office of the Internal Audit General and the Public Procurement Regulatory Authority are
prime examples of this.
6. There should be a clear separation of the activity and intended impact of the improvement for different
PFM cycles. These means that the activities for central and local government should be separate with
benchmarks and targeted outputs that stand alone. They have been mixed in the past but the
establishment of KRA 6 is an appropriate step in addressing this situation.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 32 | P a g e
2.12 A broad review of the impact of PFMRP IV on other national reforms, MDGs and general
poverty reduction
It is difficult, if not impossible to assess the general impact of the reform programme on other national reforms,
MDGs and poverty reduction. This is because the public financial management processes at different levels of
government provide the backbone for the financial planning, execution, accounting and review of all activities of
the public sector. For financial resources to be allocated correctly, funding to actually be released, internal
controls to be secure and all financial information to be accurate, the PFM processes have to be working
effectively. The fact that there are weaknesses leads to some degree of ineffectiveness of each and every other
reform. Thus improvements in PFM directly impact all of the other reforms. The degree of impact is debatable.
PFMRP IV and the other reforms have no specific benchmarks against which such impact can be measured.
PFMRP IV and its relationship with the BRN initiative and its identification of major constraints are considered
separately in section 4.2 BRN – Big Results Now.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 33 | P a g e
3 Assessment of the factors affecting progress and good implementation
When undertaking this review and consulting with the many stakeholders we found the general perceptions are
that:
The reform programme is extremely important, indeed critical to the future development of public
financial management in the Government of Tanzania.
The reform programme is a success story with a history of achievement.
The reform programme is regarded as under good management and control.
In this section of the report we examine the factors affecting progress and good implementation in more detail.
3.1 Impact of the management, coordination, and institutional settings of theprogramme
The main institutions tasked with ensuring that the reform programme keeps its focus and achieves its planned
outcomes are:
The Joint Steering Committee (JSC) – This is a joint committee of GoT and Development Partners that
makes the high-level policy decisions concerning the activities, priorities and allocations of funding for
PFMRP IV. The Deputy Permanent Secretary PFM holds the chair. The JSC is expected to meet at
least every six months.
The Project Management Committee (PMC) – This is the committee that takes the more detailed
decisions concerning activities and budgets. It is also chaired by the DPS PFM. The committee relies
on technical advice from Technical Working Groups (TWGs) concerning the detailed content of
milestones, supporting activities and appropriate funding. It is intended that the PMC should meet every
three months.
Technical Working Groups (TWGs) – There should be a TWG for each key result area meeting at least
every three months to examine in detail the technical execution of each key result area. Each TWG
should make recommendations to the PMC for changes in milestones, supporting activities and
associated funding.
Programme Manager (PM) – This is a mainstreamed position with the Director of Planning in MoF as
PM. This mainstreaming is intended to ensure that the programme is owned and held as part of normal
GoT activity.
PFMRP Secretariat – This is team of staff that assist in programme management and oversight. The
secretariat provides secretarial support to the JSC, PMC, TWGs and the PM. The team comprises a
co-ordinator as leader, a communications specialist, a procurement specialist, a monitoring and
evaluation specialist, and a finance specialist.
We make the following comments on the reform programme’s impact and co-ordination in respect of these
institutional settings:
1. The JSC, PMC and TWGs do not meet as frequently as intended by the programme’s operations
manual. We are advised that the PMC has a strong informal dialogue that is able to solve issues as
and when they arise without the need to formally meet.
2. Whilst the operations manual indicates that there is a TWG for each key result area we understand that
this is not in effect the case. The TWGs work on a less formal basis to consider issues and make
recommendations.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 34 | P a g e
3. The situation concerning the quality review and assurance of PFMRP outputs is uncertain. The TWGs
should have sufficient PFM expertise to ensure that such outputs conform to good practice. A number
of PFMRP IV outputs have been found by the review not to be in line with good practice.
4. The mainstreaming of the PM position in effect means that the Programme Manager is a part-time
position with the Programme Co-ordinator taking on more of a programme management role since that
is a full-time dedicated position.
5. The DPS PFM is the Permanent Secretary Treasury’s representative in supervising the overall conduct
of PFMRP IV. We understand that the position was created after the start of the PFMRP to specifically
deal with reform programme issues. However, the approval of the distribution of funds and hence the
effective control over execution rests with the DPS Treasury.
6. Observations concerning the positions within the PFMRP Secretariat are discussed in section
3.4.Performance of the PFMRP Secretariat and the PFM Joint Steering Committee
3.2 Impact of the various funding mechanisms on the implementation
There are three types of funding for PFMRP IV. They are:
Government of Tanzania direct funding to the programme.
Development Partners contributions to a basket of funds.
Direct support by individual Development Partners.
The majority of funding falls into the first two categories. The GoT funding usually falls far short of the levels that
are promised (see Table 13 PFMRP IV comparison of budget, releases and actual expenditure) with releases
sometimes being made late in the financial year making utilisation impossible. The Development Partners’
releases to the basket are more consistent but sometimes also suffer from delays making their utilisation difficult.
On a number of occasions during the review we encountered situations where institutions receive funding from
both the PFMRP IV and externally direct from Development Partners. The NAOT is a typical example of this.
Whilst it is possible to account for expenditure on inputs to the NAOT reforms it is difficult to attribute outcomes
to one or other of the funding sources.
3.3 Review of monitoring tools and programme management systems
These considerations are interlinked with the other programme management arrangements but for clarity we will
address the following in this section:
The monitoring and evaluation framework.
The progress reports.
The joint supervision mission reports.
The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework and supporting financial report is a well-constructed and
generally useful tool for monitoring the progress of the reforms. It should form the backbone of the monitoring
process. To that end we would expect the M&E framework to be consistently prepared and utilised constantly
throughout the implementation of PFMRP IV. We find, however, that milestones are dropped or replaced without
clear explanation. There are inconsistencies in the numbering and referencing of milestones. This is particularly
a problem with the recently separated KRA 6.
The progress reports should be prepared every quarter but are produced on a six-monthly basis. The latest
progress report is for the period ended 31st December 2014. This is apparently regarded as unofficial until it is
approved by the JSC. We wonder why this is the case since this report is a product of the reform programme
and as such should only require the approval of the Programme Manager or the DPS PFM at most. We note
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 35 | P a g e
that progress is often explained by notes simply stating that a milestone is “achieved”. In order to assess the
actual performance against planned this should include details as to when the achievement was made. The
M&E framework does not identify who is responsible for ensuring that the milestone and associated activities are
undertaken i.e. the component manager. We found many examples of milestones where the ownership is
unclear.
In both the progress reports and the annual joint supervision reports there are many milestones that are
described as “on track” when the activities under the milestone have not even started. These superfluous
assertions tend to skew the overall assessment of the progress of the programme with a large number of “on
track” milestones that simply are not. This situation is exacerbated by the lack of information in the M&E
framework of linkages and dependencies between milestones. Such linkages would quickly show where many of
the “on track” observations are incorrect.
The use of the M&E framework in the production of progress and joint supervision mission reports is incomplete.
The practice appears to be that once a milestone is regarded as complete it is dropped from the framework. This
has allowed, on occasion, milestones that we believe to be incomplete to be dropped from reports, apparently in
error. It also allows for milestone numbers to be reused with associated confusions. We also noted instances
where milestones that we would consider more measurable being dropped with associated less measurable
milestones retained.
We note that the financial reports are dependent on the information provided by component managers to the
secretariat. The reform programme is intended to be mainstreamed. As such it should allow the programme
management to fully access the GoT’s financial systems. This means that the secretariat should be able to
access the GoT’s IFMIS and extract up to date financial data in respect of each and every component manager
from the system. This would enable the Programme Manager and the DPS PFM to be fully and promptly briefed
by the secretariat on programme budget execution.
3.4 Performance of the PFMRP Secretariat and the PFM Joint Steering Committee
It took a long time before all members of the secretariat were in position. Bearing in mind that the PFMRP programme started in July 2012, for almost the entire first half of the accounting year, there were no secretariat members. The finance expert and a communication specialist were employed in November 2012, just about the end of the first half of the accounting year. The procurement specialist was employed in January 2013 and acted as a programme coordinator from February 2013 until May 2013. Effectively from May 2013, the procurement specialist was appointed as a substantive programme coordinator and hence he doubled his duties in an acting role as a procurement specialist until April 2015 when the substantive procurement specialist was appointed.
We note that an active decision was taken not to recruit a PFM Adviser within the secretariat. We question the wisdom of that decision since we observe a number of occasions where reform opportunities are being missed through the lack of an overall PFM view e.g. the current narrow accounting focus of the cash to accrual transformation, and the production of reform programme outputs that do not conform to good PFM practice (see 2.2.3PFMRP IV addressing current PFM weaknesses).
The contracts for secretariat staff do not allow retention of secretariat personnel with institutional knowledge as they are offered only two year terms that do not correspond with the duration of PFMRP phases. For example, all secretariat staff serving in PFMRP III, except the programme coordinator, were not retained with the corresponding loss of knowledge capital.
It is difficult to make an overall assessment of the performance of the secretariat since they do not have individual detailed time-bound work plans against which they themselves and the Programme Manager can measure achievement. The current annual work plans do not provide the necessary level of detail. We found that generally stakeholders were happy with the secretariat’s performance and did not come across any specific area where performance was of concern. In respect of our own expectations, however, a number of
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 36 | P a g e
observations need to be made. We had expected the secretariat to keep files of meeting papers, minutes, resolutions and the like for all JSC, PMC and TWG meetings, and have them available for use. These are apparently not maintained and certainly not made available. We also expected the secretariat to have copies of all component managers detailed and costed work plans for the achievement of each of their milestones. Again these were not available for reference. These documents are essential to enable the secretariat to advise the Programme Manager and the DPS PFM on the detailed progress of the implementation of the reforms. It appears that the secretariat has a more reactive role bringing to programme management’s attention issues in arrear, rather than a pro-active role in supporting programme management’s more immediate management and coordination of the reform programme’s activities. The JSC meets approximately every six months, subject to the constraints of identifying mutually convenient meeting dates. The JSC appears to be performing adequately in monitoring and coordinating the progress of the reform programme. We believe the original intention of meeting more frequently i.e. on a quarterly basis, is a good one. The only major challenge facing the JSC, which could be met more effectively, is a more active quality and assurance review of reform programme products and outputs. We are of the opinion that some of the reform programme outputs do not sufficiently conform to good PFM practice. The JSC should take some responsibility in ensuring that this does not happen.
3.5 Stakeholder management
A very large part of the success of a reform programme rests on the effective management of stakeholder relationships. Stakeholders not only need to be kept informed, they also need to be actively managed. There should be an active identification by the secretariat, probably with the day-to-day tracking responsibility resting with the communications specialist, of individual key stakeholders and the programme management’s agreed strategy for managing and influencing each.
The importance of this stakeholder planning can be illustrated by the identification of the following major reform initiatives where a reform product is awaiting higher level approval of a completed product. With proper stakeholder preparation and management, the higher level should be expecting, indeed demanding the urgent approval of these initiatives avoiding wasteful delays. Examples are the delays in approving:
Milestone 1.4.1 National framework for managing development co-operation.
Milestone 2.2.1Medium-term strategic planning and budgeting manual (MTSPBM).
Milestone 3.1.11 National procurement policy.
Milestone 5.4.2 Ministry of Finance Communication Strategy.
Milestone 6.2.3 LGAs budget allocation formulas.
These types of delay and the inability to secure appropriate stakeholder commitment leads a number of stakeholders that we consulted to question whether the reform programme should continue to be placed with the Ministry of Finance. The possibility of the programme being led from the President’s Office has been suggested.
In our view the Ministry of Finance is the most appropriate place for the reform programme. In this report we mention the challenges in maintaining the appropriate core public financial management focus and assurance of the quality of reform programme outputs. We believe that only the Ministry of Finance has the institutional capacity to meet those challenges.
It should be understood that in making recommendations for the secretariat to undertake the day-to-day administration and monitoring of the stakeholder management strategy we are not expecting secretariat staff to manage all stakeholders. Part of the development of the strategy is to identify stakeholders that can influence others to the benefit of the programme.
On the funding side, the PFMRP has the development partners as their participating stakeholders. The DPs are allowed to participate in the budgetary process where they indicate their areas of interest to funding as well as the outcomes from the activities. A DP representative has also been accorded a position as Co-Chairperson of the Technical Working Group (TWG). The JSC provides a forum for both DPs and Government to meet and agree on various aspects of the programme.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 37 | P a g e
On the ground, the programme does identify their intended beneficiaries and interested stakeholders who are kept in the frame of activities’ implementation progress. However, there is no stakeholder strategy developed by the PFMRP programme management. The only stakeholder strategy in place is the one prepared for the communication department under the Ministry of Finance.
3.6 Risks to the achievement of PFMRP IV outcomes
The main risks are:
1. Funding - There is general agreement amongst all stakeholders consulted that the greatest risk to the
achievement of PFMRP IV intended outcomes is one of fully available finance.
From our review we would highlight two additional risks that potentially could severely affect the continuing value
of achievement by PFMRP IV. They are:
2. Sustainability - There is need for the reform programme to ensure that its initiatives are sustainable.
Where new functions are directly financed there should be associated activities to secure ongoing
financing.
3. Quality - There needs to be an increased focus on the quality of outputs. If good practice is not
captured in the programme outputs issues will arise in the future compromising the long-term value of
the reforms.
A detailed risk assessment is given in Appendix 11– Risk analysis. In this appendix each risk is described, rated
and an individual management strategy provided.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 38 | P a g e
4 Emerging Public Financial Management Issues
4.1 Treatment of oil and gas revenues
The intentions for the treatment of oil and gas revenues are set out in the Oil and Gas Revenues Management
Bill, 2015. The main features of the proposed act are:
1. The establishment of an Oil and Gas Fund.
2. The maintenance by the Bank of Tanzania of two bank accounts, the Revenue Holding Account and the
Revenue Savings Account.
3. TRA and the National Oil Company are collectors of the oil and gas revenues to be paid into the fund.
4. The Minister for Finance is responsible for the overall management of the fund.
5. The Bank of Tanzania is the operational manager of the fund.
6. The Paymaster General is the accounting officer of the fund.
7. A Portfolio Advisory Board is established to advise on the investment of the Revenue Savings Account.
8. Fiscal rules are established for the operation of the fund and the conditions for its use in budget support
through the Consolidated Fund.
The overall intention of the proposed Act is very good from a fiscal control perspective. It should allow the oil
and gas revenue to be used for the long-term benefit of government service delivery, potentially far beyond the
revenue generating life of the oil and gas resources. There are, however, a number of observations that need to
be made from a public financial management perspective. They are:
1. The establishment of the Oil and Gas Fund. One would expect the legal status of the fund to be more
clearly established. For example, whether the fund should be regarded as a special fund under section
12 of the Public Finance Act.
2. The operation of the Oil and Gas Fund could be more clearly specified. The responsibilities for
collection of the fund revenues clearly sit with the TRA and the National Oil Company. The
mechanisms and frequency of transfers from these bodies to the fund is unclear. Section 18.(1) simply
requires this to be done in a transparent and accountable manner. No doubt the intention is for this be
dealt with by regulations issued under section 23. This should certainly include the requirement for
notifications of the deposit of such funds to the Paymaster General as the accounting officer. The
responsibility for the withdrawal of funds is less certain. The conditions attached to the withdrawal of
funds are clearly specified in the fiscal rules for the fund. However much less clear is the responsibility
for authorising and initiating each withdrawal. The withdrawal from the fund could be authorised through
the normal budgetary processes and subject to Parliamentary appropriation. The act could be read to
infer that authorisation for withdrawal is simply made through the ‘Fiscal rules’ being met. It could be the
Minister’s responsibility as supervisor of the fund, or it could be the responsibility of the Paymaster
General as the accounting officer. Indeed, it could be that the Bank of Tanzania has responsibility for
authorising and initiating withdrawals as operational managers of the fund. This should be clearly set
out in the act.
3. The Act does not include any provisions for the preparation of financial plans and forecasts for the fund.
These forecasts and budgets should be part of the overall fiscal planning of the government since the
fund can and will directly impact the availability of funds in the Consolidated Fund. These budgets and
forecasts should also be used to monitor the performance of the fund.
4. The Bank of Tanzania is required, under section 20, to maintain the books of account and to present
financial statements for the fund for audit. This fund is not a Bank of Tanzania fund, it is a Government
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 39 | P a g e
of Tanzania fund. Following usual and good practice the accounts should be maintained by the
accounting officer. Also as is usual practice one would expect the Accountant General to facilitate and
quality control the production of these statements. This is particularly the case when the accounting
officer is the Paymaster General. Part of the process of the proof of the integrity of these accounts will
be their reconciliation with those produced by the Bank of Tanzania as bankers and investment agents.
5. Section 20 also directs the Controller and Auditor General in the timing of his audit and the delivery of
reports. These are not consistent with the National Audit Act. Both the National Audit Act and this act
contain provisions that infer that their provisions override any other.
6. In section 17(1)(e)(iii)(aa) it is stated that “in the event the Revenue Saving Account has no sufficient
fund to that level, direct budget allocation is made”. Whilst this is not the usual wording for statutory
expenditure it would appear that this is the intention. Whereas in section 17(1)(e)(iii)(bb) it is stated that
“in the event the National Oil Company has special needs for investment that requires money over 0.1%
of the GDP, such money is made from the Fund available through the normal budgetary process”. This
wording indicates a normal authorisation for a withdrawal of funds by means of appropriation by
Parliament. This highlights the need for clarity on the mechanisms for withdrawal of monies from the
fund.
4.2 BRN – Big Results Now
The ‘Big Results Now’ initiative identified six national key result areas:
Table 18 BRN's National Key Result Areas6
National Key Result Area Big Results
1 Agriculture
25 commercial farming deals for paddy and sugarcane
78 collective rice irrigation and marketing schemes
275 collective warehouse based marketing schemes
2 Education Pass rate of 80% for primary and secondary school students
Improve students’ mastering of 3R in Standard I and II by implementing
skills assessment and training teachers
3 Energy Increase generation capacity from 1,010 to 2,260 MW
Access to electricity to 5 million more Tanzanians
Eliminate EPP reliance
4 Transportation Passage of 5 million tons per year through the Central Corridor
Increase port throughput by 6 million tons, rail by 2.8 million tons
Reduce road travel time from 3.5 to 2.5 days
5 Water Sustaining water supply to 15.2 million people
Restoring water supply to 5.3 million people
Extending water supply to 7 million new users
6 Resource mobilisation Increase tax revenue by TZS 3 trillion
Implementation of PPP projects valued at TZS 6 trillion
6BIG RESULTS NOW! (BRN) Presentation to PER Annual Review Meeting 4th October 2013
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 40 | P a g e
The PFMRP IV does not specifically focus on five of these six national key result areas. Resource mobilisation,
however, is a significant part of the PFMRP IV’s Key Result Area 1, which deals with domestic revenue
mobilisation for both central and local government. The general picture is one of using the PFMRP to improve
the public financial management process and hence contribute to and facilitate the achievement of the ‘Big
Results’.
The major constraints to the achievement of these ‘Big Results’ have been identified7 as:
1. Budget alignment and resource mobilisation
2. Procurement
3. Regulatory Permits
4. Legal and Court Processes
5. Skilled Staff
It can be seen from our review of PFMRP IV that major contributions to improve and eliminate the negative
aspects of the first, second and fifth constraint are a particular focus and source of achievement. This will have
positively contributed to the BRN initiative.
7BIG RESULTS NOW! (BRN) Presentation to PER Annual Review Meeting 4th October 2013
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 41 | P a g e
5 Recommendations for the future for the Public Financial Management
Reform Programme, Phase IV.
In looking at the potential future of the PFMRP in Tanzania the review considers and elaborates on
improvements in the following four areas:
The content of the reform programme.
Institutional arrangements.
Funding mechanisms and financial performance
Monitoring and evaluation, and reporting formats.
5.1 Improvements in the content of the reform programme
Our recommendations in respect of improvements in the reform programme content are split into two types. The
first is a list of recommendations concerning general principles in the choice and design of initiatives included in
the reform programme. The second is a set of specific areas that this review believes needs to be included to
secure effective public financial management arrangements for the Government of Tanzania.
As general principles we make the following recommendations:
1. Initiatives should be separately identified, monitored and managed for separate PFM processes and
cycles i.e. GoT, LGA and Zanzibar should be clearly separate from each other.
2. Care should be taken in the choice of initiatives so that the width, complexity and ambition of the
programme is managed to ensure sufficient attention is given to the priority initiatives that address the
core PFM processes.
3. To facilitate the measurement of the impact of initiatives, especially training, benchmark measurements
should be undertaken prior to and at some time post the initiative being undertaken. The first part of
any future reform programme must be measurement of a set of carefully considered and
comprehensive benchmarks.
4. The KRAs should correspond closely with the PFM cycle. In future the initiatives should be organised to
address, reform and improve discrete parts of the cycle. This ensures ownership by component
managers and tends to eliminate duplication. In section 2.4The Key Result Areas, Outputs and the
PFM cycle we identify a potential set of key result areas that could implement this recommendation.
5. Outputs, milestones and associated initiatives should be designed to create sustainable reform and not
to simply fund recurrent expenditure. To become a true reform programme the steps taken within the
reform should include the implementation of strategies to make activities sustainable within the
programme’s lifetime.
6. Linkages and dependencies between milestones should be established to ensure that the critical paths
for the reform can be more easily identified. This also ensures that these critical milestones are
properly identified and hence appropriately managed.
7. Output and milestone priorities should be identified. This is an important part of stakeholder expectation
management and assists in mitigating funding risk. It is understandable and acceptable to focus on
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 42 | P a g e
improving PEFA scores but the focus should always be on core PFM improvement. This benefits the
whole of GoT.
8. The PFMRP should undertake a general review of all milestones and activities and eliminate those
where the need and achievement of value for money is less certain.
9. Milestones should ideally relate to measurable outputs. Where they do not a related output milestone
should be established. It is this failure to identify measurable outputs and outcomes that has made it
difficult for both the reform programme generally and this review in particular, to assess impact.
10. Choosing to fund capital asset acquisition, such as acquiring or erecting a building, is incompatible with
a reform programme. As an investment activity the acquisition of a capital asset should not be
considered a reforming activity.
We continue with the following specific recommendations concerning PFMRP IV content:
11. The programme should pay more attention to effectiveness of non-salary expenditure internal controls
and timeliness and regularity of accounts reconciliation. These are identified by PEFA as being critical
areas of poor PFM performance.
12. The PFMRP should include initiatives to look at ways to include all aspects of the PFM cycle in the
transition from cash to accrual so that the benefits of this transition can improve the whole cycle. The
challenge is to transform the other processes within the PFM cycle to secure the real benefits to
resource utilisation that the transition from cash based to accrual based financial management should
generate. Accounting for execution must be compatible with budgeting in order to facilitate effective
subsequent review and oversight and optimise resource allocation and budgetary control. It is
recommended that the transition from cash to accrual should be undertaken to establish a clearer
understanding of the financial position so that real costs can be determined for the optimal allocation of
resources and so that expenditure and income is recognised at the time that goods or services are
received or delivered. This means that current assets and current liabilities are fully and promptly
identified ensuring that payment arrears and revenue/tax collection arrears are known and controlled.
This would make the transition from cash to accrual a truly reforming exercise rather than the technical
accounting exercise that it is currently.
13. The PFMRP should also include an initiative that looks at the statutory financial statements, their
purpose, their need and how they should be produced. Since the Government of Tanzania intends to
be a regional leader in the adoption of accrual based accounting it must include in the reform
programme the necessary legislative review that ensures that the positions of the various funds and
controlled entities of the various levels of government can be appropriately consolidated to both produce
meaningful reports to the legislature, shareholders and public whilst at the same time meeting
international accounting and reporting standards.
14. The PFMRP should introduce an initiative that strengthens and clarifies the Accountant General’s
position as GoT’s accountant. In particular, this should address contradictions with the role of the
Commissioner for Budget. It should re-establish the Accountant General as the author of reliable, quality
budget execution financial data.
15. Similarly, we recommend that the PFMRP includes an initiative that addresses the reduction of the
independence of the Controller and Auditor General and National Audit Office of Tanzania as a result of
the recent changes in budget scrutiny and approval processes.
5.2 Improvements in institutional arrangements
We make the following recommendations in respect of improvement in performance of the PFMRP IV
institutional arrangements:
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 43 | P a g e
1. The DPS PFM should take a more active and prominent role in overall PFMRP management and
guidance. Any overlaps and confusions with the role of the DPS Treasury should be eliminated. The
DPS PFM should take on a pro-active role in ensuring that the reform programme is not undertaking
activity that results in inconsistency with good PFM practice.
2. There is a need for a capable PFM Adviser. We question the wisdom of the decision not to recruit to
that position. We observe a number of occasions where reform opportunities are being missed through
the lack of an overall PFM view e.g. the current narrow accounting focus of the cash to accrual
transformation, and the production of reform programme outputs that do not conform to good PFM
practice
3. The JSC should meet every three months and take a much more active role in the quality review of
reform programme outputs to ensure that the reform programme is not promoting activity that is
inconsistent with good practice.
4. There should be a very clear ownership of each milestone by a component manager. That ownership
should be recorded in the M&E Framework document.
5. The PFMRP Secretariat staff should prepare individual detailed time-bound work plans against which
they themselves, the Programme Manager and the DPS PFM can measure achievement.
6. The PFMRP Secretariat should keep files of meeting papers, minutes, resolutions and the like for all
JSC, PMC and TWG meetings. The secretariat should also retain copies of all component managers
detailed and costed work plans for the achievement of each of their milestones. These documents are
essential to enable the secretariat to advise the Programme Manager and the DPS PFM on the detailed
progress of the implementation of the reforms.
7. The PFMRP Secretariat should have a pro-active role in supporting programme management’s
immediate management and coordination needs for the reform programme. This should include the
DPS PFM ensuring that the secretariat’s finance specialist has access to up to date data from the IFMIS
on the financial performance of the component managers’ use of funds.
5.3 Improvements in funding mechanisms and financial performance
The PFMRP Secretariat only includes data and undertakes follow-up when reports from the component
managers are received. In the previous section we have recommended that the finance specialist be given
access to real time data from the IFMIS. The secretariat and programme management will then be able to
monitor financial performance more pro-actively.
As previously mentioned in this report the data shows that there is a continuing and consistent under release and
under spend on all reform programme activities. This is probably a reflection of the way that development
activities and funding are administered. Current GoT rules and regulations do not distinguish between the
procedures for budgetary control over development and recurrent activities, even though the natures of the two
activities are obviously different. A major difference is in procurement. For development the procurement period
and the length of time over which a contract is executed is often extended. The expiry of funding at the end of a
financial year is problematic. There are mechanisms that can be employed that will allow warrants not to lapse
at financial year-end or some other carry-over arrangements made that allow development funding not to be lost
at the end of financial year.
1. We recommend that the DPS PFM as part of PFMRP IV supervise an initiative that looks into and
recommends a solution to this problem.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 44 | P a g e
A review of budget estimates showed they may be overly generous resulting in overestimation. As such we
recommend that the budget should be set at levels that resemble the attainable outputs of activity
implementation.
During the review when interviewing component managers and requesting evidence of achievement we found
that for some it was quite difficult to distinguish between achievement supported by PFMRP IV resources and
those resources provided directly by development partners.
2. We certainly recommend that all development partners be encouraged to become part of the PFMRP,
and preferably basket fund participants, provided of course that the initiatives being supported are
appropriately relevant.
It is probable that this situation might be an illustration of the need for Milestone 1.4.1 National framework for
managing development co-operation to be completed to ensure appropriate co-ordination of development
partner support in the future.
5.4 Improvements in monitoring and evaluation, and reporting formats
We make the following recommendations in respect of improvement in performance of the PFMRP IV monitoring
and evaluation, and reporting formats:
1. The monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework and supporting financial report is a well-constructed
and generally useful tool for monitoring the progress of the reforms. We recommend that the M&E
framework to be consistently prepared and utilised constantly throughout the implementation of PFMRP
IV. It should appear in its entirety in each progress and supervision report. We would recommend the
addition of component manager, linkages and interdependencies, and level of priority information to that
given in Appendix 6 – Progress in the PFMRP IV Outputs.
2. We would recommend more careful use of the term “on track” in progress and supervision mission
reporting. In both the progress reports and the annual joint supervision reports there are many
milestones that are described as “on track” when the activities under the milestone have not even
started. These superfluous assertions tend to skew the overall assessment of the progress of the
programme with a large number of “on track” milestones that simply are not.
3. We recommend that progress reports be prepared on a quarterly basis.
4. A very large part of the success of a reform programme rests on the effective management of
stakeholder relationships. Stakeholders not only need to be kept informed, they also need to be actively
engaged and managed. We recommend that a much more pro-active stakeholder management
strategy be adopted by the programme management and be facilitated by the PFMRP Secretariat.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 45 | P a g e
Appendix 1 – Terms of Reference
TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR INDEPENDENT MID-TERM REVIEW OF PUBLIC FINANCE
MANAGEMENT REFORM PROGRAM PHASE FOUR (PFMRP IV)
1.0 Introduction
The government has been implementing the Public Financial Management Reform Program (PFMRP)
since 1998 with the objective of enhancing Public Financial Management, Transparency and
Accountability. PFMRP is implemented in line with other on-going reform programmes in the Public
Sector. Also PFMRP complements efforts to realize national policy objectives stated in Tanzania
Development Vision 2025 and MKUKUTA/MKUZA.
Between 1998 and 2012, three phases of PFMRP have been implemented and the current fourth
phase is being implemented for the period 2012/13 to 2016/17. The last three phases of PFMRP
implementation had the following objectives:
PFMRP PHASE I: 1998 – 2004
The objectives of this phase were to control expenditure, introduce aggregate fiscal discipline and
contribute to stable macro-economic growth. The phase focused on minimizing resource leakage,
strengthening financial control and enhancing accountability by reforming the budget process and
introducing Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS).
PFMRP PHASE II: 2004 – 2008
The objective of phase II was to sustain achievements of phase I and progressively modernize the
processes, procedures and systems involved in PFM through implementation and use of ‘best practice’
tools, techniques and methodologies to improve revenue forecasting and resource allocation for
strategic priorities.
PFMRP PHASE III: 2008 – 2011
Phase III intended to ensure greater predictability and availability of medium term resources to
executing agencies. The thrust was towards getting the tools, techniques, methodologies and systems
that were introduced in the previous phase to work efficiently and effectively in an integrated manner.
During implementation of the previous three phases, the Government has registered notable
achievements among others including the following: enactment of Public Audit Act No. 11 of 2008 for
enhancing operational independence of the National Audit Office; enactment of Public Finance Act No.
6 of 2001 and its amendment in 2010 and Public Procurement Act No. 21 of 2004 as amended in 2011
to enhance transparency and accountability; under the amendment of Public Finance Act in 2010, the
Internal Audit General’s Department was established. Under the same amendment, the Assistant
Accountant General Office to oversee LGAs finances was established. More achievements under this
phase included timely submission of CAG annual audit reports; adoption of Government Financial
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 46 | P a g e
Statistics (GFS) codes 2001 and Classification of Functions of Government (COFOG); introduction and
expansion of financial management systems to automate various key PFM processes including IFMS,
LAWSON, CS-DRMS, SBAS; use of EPICOR by all sub-treasuries in MDAs and 86 LGAs;
strengthening capacity of Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee to execute its oversight function;
identifying and closing down dormant bank accounts in order to improve cash management; and
provision of capacity building to staff involved in public finance management.
Despite these achievements PFMRP faces a number of challenges namely; inaccuracy in
Macroeconomic and fiscal forecasting, inadequate capturing of linkages between development
spending and the recurrent cost of the development budget, low predictability of budget execution,
existence of differing external and domestic debt systems, problems with program and contract
management and delayed response to audit recommendations.
PFMRP PHASE IV: 2012 – 2017
In order to address the challenges observed in previous phases, the Government developed PFMRP IV
Strategy to be implemented for five years from July, 2012 to June, 2017. PFMRP IV is part of
Government efforts to pursue a national development agenda that seeks to inspire sustained economic
growth and reduce the high incidence of poverty. In this regard PFMRP IV seeks to contribute to
implementation of Tanzania Development Vision 2025, MKUKUTA, Millennium Development Goals
(MDGs), Five Year Development Plans and other development initiatives.
Specifically, PFMRP IV aims at strengthening and improving public financial management systems in a
more coordinated manner in order to address the challenges experienced. Furthermore, PFMRP Phase
IV aims at enabling reforms in the five key areas of Revenue Management; Planning and Budget
Management; Budget Execution, Transparency and Accountability; Budgetary Control and Oversight
and; Change Management and Program Monitoring and Communication. Phase IV is designed to attain
more effective and efficient budget formulation, implementation and control in order to contribute to
broad-based economic growth as well as a vibrant private sector development.
PFMRP IV is in its 3rd year of its implementation. So far the programme has realized achievements
including the following: installation of Aid Management Platform (AMP) which is a web-based aid
management information system. Carrying out several studies which include Non Tax Revenue and
own source study in LGAs for mobilization of more revenue for both Central and Local Government,
2013 PEFA study for Central government which revealed a number of weaknesses in PFM; conducting
Intergovernmental transfers assessment and developing an Action Plan. Other achievements include
publishing Budget Execution Report, Citizen Budget and Citizen Auditing Reports each year and
enhancing NAOT capacity. Currently NAOT auditing quality has been elevated to level 3 of AFROSAI-E
capability model; EPICOR system has been upgraded from version 7.3.5 to version 9.05 with 7
modules have been installed of which 6 modules have been activated. Network connectivity to all Sub
Treasuries has facilitated better expenditure control and enabled timely production and consolidation of
financial statements and reports.
In order to assess PFMRP implementation progress and chart the way forward, Government of
Tanzania and Development Partners have agreed to commission an Independent Mid Term Review
(MTR). Accordingly, MOF wishes to engage a consultant to undertake this review. The results of the
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 47 | P a g e
mid-term review will principally be used by the key PFM stakeholders to improve implementation of the
program in an efficient and effective manner during the second half of program implementation.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
The objective of MTR is to provide a comprehensive independent analysis at mid-term of the program
and provide an opportunity to critically identify potential program design problems, assess progress
towards the achievement of the program objective and outcomes, identify the challenges, identify and
document lessons learned, and make recommendations on how PFMRP IV can successfully meet its
objectives and targets by the program end. It will evaluate the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and
sustainability of program strategies and interventions and provide recommendations to further improve
these program qualities. MTR will also identify emerging PFM issues related to gas economy and BRN
that will inform future PFM programs.
3.0 SCOPE OF THE MID-TERM REVIEW
The scope of Mid-Term Review will cover all components and activities undertaken in the framework of
the program. The review team will compare planned outputs of the program to actual outputs and
assess the actual results to determine their contribution to the attainment of the program objectives.
The evaluation will diagnose problems and suggest any necessary corrections and adjustments and
identify current areas where attention is needed. It will evaluate the efficiency of program management,
including the delivery of outputs and activities in terms of quality, quantity, timeliness and cost
efficiency.
4.0 METHODOLOGY
The Mid-Term Review will be conducted by an independent consultant on the basis that its essential
objective is to assess performance of the program and to document both successes and failures and to
provide a basis for improvement during the second half of the program’s lifespan. Methods will include:
1. Review existing documents related to PFMRP, including but not limited to:
(i) PFMRP IV Strategy, MoU, and Operational Manual
(ii) PFMRP Phase III Completion report
(iii) PFMRP IV annual progress report (Fiscal Year 2012/13 to 2013/14);
(iv) PFMRP IV Joint Supervision Mission reports (Fiscal Year 2012/13 to 2013/14)
(v) PEFA reports 2009 and 2013;
(vi) Public Finance Act 2001 as revised in 2004;
(vii) Controller and Auditor General Annual Reports for relevant years
(viii) Studies and reports established under PFMRP IV- a list of which is provided in
Annex A.
(ix) Reforming Tanzania Public Sector- an assessment and future direction.
(x) BRN strategic documents
(xi) Phase IV Joint Supervision Mission Reports
2. Make interview with key stakeholders including MOF Senior Officials; all component
managers implementing the program; beneficiaries of the programmes (trainees, etc.);
Bank of Tanzania; Ministry of Energy and Minerals; Office of the Chief Secretary, Ministry
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 48 | P a g e
of Health and Social Welfare; Ministry of Education; Reform Coordination Unit of the
President’s Office; Tanzania Revenue Authority; selected Regional Secretariats; LGAs;
selected Civil Societies.
3. Making observations of PFMRP IV systems and software’s installed to assess quality
environment.
4. Make field visit to sample program sites with the purpose of interviewing program
beneficiaries.
The consultant will be required to indicate the methodology to be applied in undertaking the
assignment, with a clear indication and justification for the techniques to be used. The methodology
should include a work plan for performing the assignment and the required resources to achieve the
expected output of the assignment.
5.0 TASKS OF THE CONSULTANT
Tasks under this consultancy assignment will include:
(a) Reviewing and evaluating implementation of the program achievements against plan and
objectives and providing recommendations to the Government of Tanzania on how to fine-
tune or re-design the program, its target and indicator formulation or its approach if
necessary to improve delivery of expected outcomes and impacts.
(b) Reviewing the extent to which implementation of the program has been inclusive of
relevant stakeholders and to which it has been able to create collaboration between
different partners; and identifying opportunities for stronger substantive partnerships. This
should include also stakeholders that have not, or only to a limited extent, been
recipients/participants to the PFMRP IV programme so far.
(c) Analyzing which factors and constraints have influenced program implementation including
technical, financial; managerial, organizational, institutional and socio-economic policy
factors in addition to other external factors unforeseen during design.
(d) Assessing program results and PFM impacts, in terms of development outcomes,
achievement of MDGs, with focus in the areas of Aggregate Fiscal Discipline, strategic
allocation of resources; efficient service delivery.
(e) Identify emerging PFM issues in the event of potential gas reserves fructifying in the
medium to longer term and the PFM implications thereof.
(f) Assessing the quality and adequacy of the financial planning instruments to check how
they relate to government’s approved budget and financial statements and compatibility or
not.
(g) Reviewing the monitoring tools and system currently being used if they provide the
necessary information, involve key partners; use existing information; their efficiency and
cost-effectiveness and if additional tools are required.
(h) Given the high number of capacity building activities and trainings on the programme, the
consultant should provide an assessment of the impact and cost-effectiveness of these
activities, as well as recommendations on how to make them more relevant if necessary,
taking into account the PFM capacity building activities carried out in addition to the ones
funded under PFM RP.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 49 | P a g e
(i) Similarly, given the high number of studies and diagnostic reports carried out under the
programme, the consultant should assess what has been their impact so far in terms of
policy making, legislation/regulation drafting, etc.
(j) Assessing critical risks identified, including the ones outside the immediate control of the
program’s management, and suggesting risk ratings and possible risk management
strategies to be adopted.
6.0 RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE CLIENT (i.e. Ministry of Finance)
MOF will provide support as follows:
a) Assist with logistics concerning missions including meetings,
b) Provide relevant background information and documents to the successful consultant;
c) Provide comments on all draft deliverables.
7.0 OUTPUT/DELIVERABLES
The deliverables of the assignment will be:
(i) An Inception Report two weeks after the start of the mission. The inception report
should contain a brief outline on how the consultant intends to carry out the
assignment. The report shall summarize the methodology to be used, detailed work
plan and any other issue of importance that may require the attention of the Client (i.e.
Ministry of Finance) at this stage. The consultant shall present the inception report to
key stakeholders including Development Partners.
(ii) Draft Mid-Term Review Report. To be submitted two weeks before the end of the
assignment. The report will include recommendations on the implementation of the
program. The report shall be logically structured, contain evidence based findings,
conclusions, lessons and recommendations. The draft report shall be presented to all
key stakeholders who will provide comments on the Draft Report for incorporation in
the final report.
(iii) A final Mid-Term evaluation report: The final evaluation report, incorporating comments
made on the draft report should be presented both in hard copy and an electronic
version. The report shall be written in Microsoft Word for Windows and should be
presented in a way that enables publication without further editing. The executive
Summary shall include the main conclusions about the extent to which the program
has fulfilled its objectives, what are lessons learnt, has worked well and suggested
improvements for future program.
9.0 LEVEL OF EFFORT
It is estimated that this work will require 120 person days.
10.0 TIMEFRAME
The assignment is planned to take place between January and March, 2015.
11.0 QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERTISE
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 50 | P a g e
The Mission will consist of a two-member team of consultants with the following minimum qualifications:
General minimum qualifications:
(a) Recent knowledge of result-based management evaluation methodologies
(b) Recent knowledge of participatory monitoring approaches
(c) Substantive experience in reviewing and evaluating similar programs/projects, preferably those
involving PFM;
(d) Demonstrate ability to assess complex situations, succinctly distil critical issues, and draw
forward-looking conclusions and recommendations;
(e) Knowledgeable of participatory monitoring and evaluation processes, and experience in
evaluation of technical assistance PFM with major donor agencies;
(f) Minimum of Masters Degree in related fields.
(g) Fluency in written and spoken English.
(h) Highly knowledgeable of evaluation processes, and experience in evaluation of donor funded
programs;
Team Leader
Will possess in depth understanding and experience in PFM. He/she will have the overall responsibility
of organizing and completing the review, and submitting the final report.
(a) Should possess at minimum, Masters degree in economics, business administration,
program management or relevant post-graduate university level education with a minimum
of 10 years experience in the Monitoring and Evaluation of major program and/or projects;
(b) The suitable candidate should have adequate experience, knowledge and skills in Public
Finance Management (PFM) of at least 8 years;
(c) Sound experience in using MTEF and other tools for Government planning, budgeting,
financial management and reporting;
(d) Sound communication skills both verbal and written and ability to document clearly for
internal and external stakeholders;
(e) Ability to undertake regular field visits and interact with different stakeholders, especially
Component Managers to build relationship both at individual and institutional levels;
(f) Experience of using Logical Framework Analysis and Result Based Management (RBM)
Frameworks.
Assistant Consultant
(a) The Consultant will have the same qualification as the Lead Consultant except less
experience of at least 5 years experience in similar assignment.
(b) Be fluent in Kiswahili.
12.0 REPORTING
The consultants shall work with the Ministry of Finance and will report to the Deputy Permanent
Secretary- DSPFM. On a day-to-today basis the consultants will work closely with the Director of
Planning Division.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 51 | P a g e
13.0 COUNTER-PART STAFF
The Ministry of Finance shall assign one counter-part staff during the whole period of the assignment
who will receive on the job-training for capacity building and knowledge transfer. The counterpart staffs
will be responsible to the consultant but shall not be accountable for the report that will be submitted to
the client. The Ministry of Finance shall be responsible for the counterpart’s staff’s related costs during
the whole period of the assignment.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 52 | P a g e
Annex A: List of studies carried out under PFMRP IV
Study/report Main objective Plan Status update
KRA 1- Revenue Management
A study on Local
Government
Authorities (LGAs)
‘‘own-source’’
revenue collection
To assess the existing major
revenue sources and their
potential as well as the
collection system/procedures
rules and regulations available
in order to identify gaps and
options for improvements;
To identify new sources of
revenue and recommend
improvements methods in the
revenue collection system or
the tax administration to
overcome tax evasion,
collection efficiency,
enforcement and therefore
voluntary tax compliance.
Draft report in
November 2013
Stakeholder
consultations in March
2014.
Final report and action
plan to be finalised in
July 2014.
Report
Study on integration
and harmonisation of
MDAs Revenue
Collection Systems
To examine the existing
revenue collection and
management systems of non-
tax revenue in relation to tax
revenues and recommend a
modality for integrating revenue
records and collection systems
Draft report shared to
internal stakeholders in
Nov 2013.
Final report and action
plan expected to be
discussed in July 2014.
Report
KRA 2- Budgeting and Planning
A detailed analysis of
To undertake a detailed
analysis of budget reallocation
warrants (virement between
Report
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 53 | P a g e
budget reallocation
warrants in Tanzania
for the last four years
votes) in Tanzania for the last
four years in order to identify
key budget execution issues
and suggest recommendations,
including policy changes, to
minimize budget reallocations
Interim report is ready
for discussion with
stakeholders foreseen
for July 2014
Review of resource
allocation formula for
Local Government
Authorities in
Tanzania
To review LGAs’ resource
allocation formulas for
recurrent and development
expenditures to provide LGAs
with greater stability and
transparency in their budget
allocations and facilitate more
effective and accountable
financial planning and
budgeting processes
Contract negotiation in
process for consultant.
Assignment to begin in
July 2014
Report
KRA4- Oversight and Control
Study of the national
budget
To study the magnitude of the
problem and financial impact of
the budget performance to the
individual MDAs and LGAs and
the consolidated national
economy at large.
Report
Survey on
composition and
effectiveness of
internal audit
committees in the
LGAs in Tanzania
To facilitate/enable the Office
of the Internal Auditor General
(IAGD) to understand the
current status of audit
committees in LGAs, and to
inform practical strategies that
will be aimed at enhancing the
effectiveness of audit
committee in LGAs.
Final report submitted
Report
Survey on
effectiveness of
Internal Audit
Functions in LGAs
To conduct baseline survey on
internal audit function in LGAs
so as to identify and document
their current status as well as
recommend practical
interventions for strengthening
internal audit function in LGAs
Final report submitted
Report
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 54 | P a g e
KRA5- Programme Management, Change management and Cross-cutting issues
A study on mapping
of transfer of funds to
LGAs
To carry out a critical review of
the existing processes and
systems that are currently
being used to allocate, release
and transfer funds from both
Government and external
sources to LGAs with a special
attention on the predictability,
completeness, timeliness and
transparency of funds transfer.
Final report in
September 2013.
Action plan agreed at
technical level in Dec
2013 and incorporated
in FY2014/15 budget
Report
Mapping, modelling
and simulation on
Government of
Tanzania Financial
Management
Systems
The mapping of the
government’s ICT systems
related to financial
management should lead to a
proposal on a long-term
Enterprise Integration
Architecture (EIA) for all
applications and processes
Draft final report in
March 2014
Final report and action
plan to be discussed in
June 2014
Report
Crosscutting
2013 Public
Expenditure and
Financial
Accountability
(PEFA) Assessment
Mainland Tanzania
(Central
Government)
To assess the PFM system
performance of the
Government of Tanzania using
the PEFA assessment
methodology and establish a
baseline for the PFMRP IV,
which started mid-2012, and to
gauge progress in
strengthening performance
since the last PEFA
assessment conducted during
2008-2010.
Report
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 55 | P a g e
Appendix 2 – Consultant tasks from the terms of reference and associated report
content
(a) Reviewing and evaluating implementation of the program achievements against plan and objectives and
providing recommendations to the Government of Tanzania on how to fine-tune or re-design the program, its
target and indicator formulation or its approach if necessary to improve delivery of expected outcomes and
impacts.
This first task is in effect a high level overview and is addressed by the whole report.
(b) Reviewing the extent to which implementation of the program has been inclusive of relevant stakeholders
and to which it has been able to create collaboration between different partners; and identifying opportunities
for stronger substantive partnerships. This should include also stakeholders that have not, or only to a
limited extent, been recipients/participants to the PFMRP IV programme so far.
The report highlights the need for the reform programme management to establish a stakeholder management
process (section 3.5). This section points out that the stakeholders that do not appear to have been sufficiently
engaged are those at the higher level. These stakeholders if appropriately managed should be demanding
change rather than delaying it.
(c) Analyzing which factors and constraints have influenced program implementation including technical,
financial; managerial, organizational, institutional and socio-economic policy factors in addition to other
external factors unforeseen during design.
The whole report is an analysis of the factors and constraints on programme implementation. These constraints
are analysed and assessed throughout the main analysis section of the report i.e. chapters 2, 3 and 4, ranging
from their impact on: the design of the programme; implementation; emerging public financial management
issues; and programme management.
(d) Assessing program results and PFM impacts, in terms of development outcomes, achievement of MDGs,
with focus in the areas of Aggregate Fiscal Discipline, strategic allocation of resources; efficient service
delivery.
The purpose of this task is to assess at an interim stage the impact of PFM reform achievement on these areas.
The report in chapters 2, 3 and 4 with further detail in Appendices 4 to 9 assesses programme results at all
levels for all areas. It is important to take note that this is not a final evaluation of the programme.
(e) Identify emerging PFM issues in the event of potential gas reserves fructifying in the medium to longer term
and the PFM implications thereof.
This task is specifically addressed in chapter 4.
(f) Assessing the quality and adequacy of the financial planning instruments to check how they relate to
government’s approved budget and financial statements and compatibility or not.
As clarified at our initial client meetings we understand these to be the financial planning instruments of the
reform programme itself and its management. These are considered in chapter 3.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 56 | P a g e
(g) Reviewing the monitoring tools and system currently being used if they provide the necessary information,
involve key partners; use existing information; their efficiency and cost-effectiveness and if additional tools
are required.
This is addressed in chapter 3 and is specifically considered in section 3.3.
(h) Given the high number of capacity building activities and trainings on the programme, the consultant should
provide an assessment of the impact and cost-effectiveness of these activities, as well as recommendations
on how to make them more relevant if necessary, taking into account the PFM capacity building activities
carried out in addition to the ones funded under PFM RP.
This task is specifically addressed by section 2.8 with a caveat expressed in section 1.2.
(i) Similarly, given the high number of studies and diagnostic reports carried out under the programme, the
consultant should assess what has been their impact so far in terms of policy making, legislation/regulation
drafting, etc.
Again this task is specifically addressed by section 2.8 with a caveat expressed in section 1.2.
(j) Assessing critical risks identified, including the ones outside the immediate control of the program’s
management, and suggesting risk ratings and possible risk management strategies to be adopted.
At a high level this is the topic for section 3.6. These are the key risks. A detailed analysis of risk is given in
Appendix 11– Risk analysis. In this appendix each risk is described, a rating given and an individual
management strategy provided.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 57 | P a g e
Appendix 3 – Documents
Five year Work Plan
PFMRP IV Annual progress report 2012/13, 2013/14
Draft mid-term report 2014/15
Updated M&E framework
Five year work plan
PFMRPIV Strategy report
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Report on Performance of Cross Cutting Reforms-November 2013 (Annex I &II)
Strategic Design Document- LGA PFM Reform Support Final Report
PEFA report 2009
PFMRP III completion report
Joint supervision report 2012, 2013
Final AWP & Budget 2013/14, 204/15 PFMRP IV Narratives
PFMRP Consolidated Budget 2013/14 Final JSC (a, b, and c), 2014/15
Work-plan PFMRP five Year and Budget-Revised for 2013/14, 2014/15 Final Revised JSC
Work-plan PFMRP five Year and Budget 2012/13 with AfDB fund
Final Cash Flow Projections-Narratives
Cash Flow 2012/13, 2013/14, and 2014/15
PFMRP IV DP Commitment and Disbursements Schedule FY 2014/15
PFM LGA Budget 2014/15
Regional & LGA PFM Support Programme- Results Milestones and Activities Matrix
PFMRP One year MTEF Consolidated Final with AfDB Bank
Study on Mapping of Transfer of Funds to Local Government Authorities (LGAs) 2013 Final Report
Study on local Government Authorities (LGAs) Own Source Revenue Collection
Study on Integration and Harmonization of MDAs Revenue Collection Systems
Study on Mapping, Modelling and Simulation on Government of Tanzania Financial Management
Systems
Local Government Development Grant (LGDG) System: Implementation and Guidelines
Local Government Development Grant (LGDG) System: Annual Assessment Manual
Consolidated Financial Statements for Year Ended 30th June 2013
Consolidated Financial Statements for the Year Ended 30th June 2014
Report of the Controller and Auditor General on the Consolidated Financial Statements of the GOT
for the Year Ended 30th June 2014
Draft Report on Baseline Survey: The Composition and Effectiveness of Audit Committees in Local
Government
Guidelines for the Preparation of Annual Plan and Budget for 2015/16
Implementation of 5 year Development Plan 2011/12-2015/16
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 58 | P a g e
Public Expenditure and Financial Accountability (PEFA) Assessment: Mainland Tanzania (Central
Government)
Annual Work Plan & budget FY 2015-16
Mid-year progress report 2014/15
TWG timetable 2015
Cash flow projections narratives
Procurement 2015
PFMRP consolidated budget
Cash flow 2015-16
Review study document of GoT ICT infrastructure
EFMs strategy document
Annual budget reports 2012/13, 2013/14, 2014/15
PFMRP MTEF FISM 2012/13, 2013/14
Budget 2013/14, and 2014/15
Annual joint mission supervision Missions Reports (Aide memoire) for 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15
Mid-year progress report for June-Dec 2012 and 2013
Mid-year review Mar 2015 documents
CAG 2013-14 Audit report (Power-point presentation)
Amendment of Operations Manual as approved by JSC in Oct 2014- Final
Amendment of Operations Manual for approved by JSC in Nov 2014- Final
PMC Minutes for Meeting held on 22nd may 2014
Review of annual procurement plan for year 2014-15
Revised PFMRP IV M&E Framework 2014-15
JSC, PMC Agenda doc
Procurement plan 2014-15
Procurement Audit reports- Final report NAO, Final Report PPRA and Final Report MoF 2013/14
Reviewed
AWP & Budget FY 2014/15 PFMRP IV Narrative
PFMRP Consolidated Budget 2014/15
Cash Flow Projections-narratives
Cash flow 2014/15
PPRA Annual Progress Report
PFMRP 1st Quarter Report 2014/15
First Quarter Receipts Expenditure 2014-October 2014
PFMRP Mid Year Progress Report (M&E Framework)
Semi Annual Progress Report (PFMRP Jan 2015)
PFM-PAF 2015 –procurement
PFMRP Budget Ceiling revised 2015
PPRA Monitoring Template for Planned Activities
PFMRP Financial Reporting- 3rd Quarter
PFMRP Financial Reporting-Annual 2013/14
PPRA Annual Progress Report 2013/14
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 59 | P a g e
Financial Report (PPRA)2013
PPRA Annual Report (PFMRP) -Form no 3
PFMRP 2nd Quarter Progress Report (PPRA-KRA3)
Amendment of PFMRP IV GoT Memorandum of Understanding 202/13-2016/17
Core Reforms Review 2013
Joint Donor Assessment of Underlying Principles November 2013- Conclusions
Joint Donor Assessment of Underlying Principles November 2014- Conclusions
Report of the Controller and Auditor General on The Consolidated Financial Statements of the GoT
for year ended 30th June 2014
Draft Report on Strategy for Management of Electronic Financial Management Systems
Report on Review of Got Electronic Financial Management Systems Infrastructure
Statement of Reallocation warrants within votes No. 1&2 of 2014/15
Citizens reports FY 2011/12, 2012/13
Guidelines for developing and Implementing Fraud Risk Management Framework in the Public Sector
2015
Guidelines for Enhancing Internal Control frameworks in the Public Sector 2015
General Report in the Performance and Specialized Audits for period ending 31st March 2015
Joint Assistance Strategy for Tanzania December 2006
Aid Management Platform: Analysis of ODA Report for FY2010/11 & 2011/12, 2012/13
Reforming Tanzania Public Sector Report: An Assessment and Future Direction, November 2013
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 60 | P a g e
Appendix 4 – Stakeholders consulted
Name of Person Position Institution
1 Dr.Servacius B. Likwelile Permanent Secretary and Pay Master General
Ministry of Finance(MoF)
2 Dr. H. H. Mwinyimvua DSPFM Ministry of Finance(MoF)
3 MsabahaMsabaha Acting Director of Planning MoF Ministry of Finance
4 Sebastian Ndandala Coordinator PFMRP Secretariat
5 Alexander Lweikila Communication Specialist PFMRP Secretariat
6 Ben Mayobu Procurement Specialist PFMRP Secretariat
7 Denis Biseko World Bank GoT Budget Support World Bank
8 Jean Jose Padou Public Financial Management Advisor CIDA
9 Stanley Haule Assistant Director Financial Management Information System
DFMIS-MoF
10 Dr.LawrentShirima CEO Public Procurement Regulatory Authority (PPRA)
11 Peter Shilla Director information Systems PPRA
12 Winfrida Samba Contracts Performance Manager PPRA
13 Robert Kitalala Head Procurement Management Unit PPRA
14 Hanna Mwakalinga Director Corporate Services PPRA
15 Awadhi Suluo Acting Director, Capacity Building and Advisory Services
PPRA
6 Christopher Mwakibinga Chief Internal Auditor PPRA
17 Dr. Frederick A. Mwakibinga Commissioner Public Procurement Policy Division- MoF
18 Prof MussaJuma Assad Controller and Auditor General National Audit Office
19 Athumani S. Mbuttuka Deputy Auditor General National Audit Office
20 Malima M. C. Nkilijiwando Head Planning Unit National Audit Office
21 S.O. Mukhandi Assistant Director-Local Government Finances, Local Government Division
Prime Minister’s Office- Regional Administration and Local Government
22 UpendoMangali Local Government Finances, Local Government Division
Prime Minister’s Office- Regional Administration and Local Government
23 Mette Melson Co-Chair Development Partners -Counselor (Economics and Public Financial Management)
DANIDA
24 ViveckMisra Chair Development Partners - Public Financial Management Advisor
DFID
25 Aran Corrigan Senior Governance Advisor Embassy of Ireland
26 Allen Killewo Financial Systems & Audit Advisor Embassy of Ireland
27 Richard Mkumbo Commissioner for Planning Division Department for Planning Division (DPD)-MoF
28 J Cheyo Commissioner of Budget MoF
29 Mwanaidi A. Mtanda Accountant General Office of the Internal Auditor General
30 Victor D. Tesha Assistant Accountant General/LG Office of the Internal Auditor General
31 Kifile Aziz Assistant Accountant General /System Office of the Internal Auditor General
32 Stanley Mlula PCSA Office of the Internal Auditor General
33 BathalomeoLyamuya REV Office of the Internal Auditor General
34 Simon J. Mangu Ag. CA/FMG Office of the Internal Auditor
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 61 | P a g e
Name of Person Position Institution
General
35 GodloveKinyunyu Ag. SDU (A) Office of the Internal Auditor General
36 MwajumaMbogoyo Assistant Accountant General Office of the Internal Auditor General
37 David Dotto Ag. CMU Office of the Internal Auditor General
38 M. Paschal Office of the Internal Auditor General
39 Kalugendo Acting Chief Accountant Consolidation Office of the Internal Auditor General
40 Mohammed A. Mtonga Internal Auditor General Internal Auditor General Division
41 Ms. Vicky Jengo Ag AIAG (B&P) Internal Auditor General Division
42 Dickson Austin AB (AIAGCRM) Internal Auditor General Division
43 Lightness Mality IA (QA) Internal Auditor General Division
44 Elikira Mathew PA II (QA) Internal Auditor General Division
45 MwanyikaMsemroki AIAG-LGA Internal Auditor General Division
46 Aidan Eyakuze Executive Director Twaweza
47 ApolinaryTamayamali Reform Coordinator Reform Coordination Unit
48 Alex John Haraba Assistant Commissioner PPPD
49 Vivian Klein KfW
50 Philipp Schattenmann GIZ
51 Achim Blum GIZ
52 LoiseLaliberte Canada
53 Joseph Nyamboha JICA
54 Lars M Johansson Sweden
55 Victor Mollel EU Delegation
56 Simon Moshy PFM DP Coordinator
57 Bertha Malambugi Head of Planning Unit Treasury Registrar Office
58 AbiskyNalaki Planning Officer Treasury Registrar Office
59 Gerald T. Nzalalila Planning Officer Treasury Registrar Office
60 Godfrey Kaijage Financial Management AfDB
61 B. Shallanda Policy Analysis Department
62 Wilbrod C. Nkweto Principal Finance Management Officer Policy Analysis Department
63 YoswamNyongera Government Procurement Agency
64 MukajunguKamuzora PFMRP Focal Point EFD External Finance Department
65 AndambikeMwalolo Economist External Finance Department
66 JustunKomba External Finance Department
67 Omar Mungima Aid Management Platform External Finance Department
68 Alfred Dede DHRM Human Resource Management Division- MoF
69 Guy Anderson Public Financial Management Advisor AFRITEC
70 TawfikRamtoolah Public Financial Management Advisor AFRITEC
71 Ibrahim K Liguo Treasury Registrar Office
72 Frank Mtyama Government Budget Division
73 George Kamyama PSV Government Asset Management Department
74 MohamediMdoka SV Government Asset Management Department
75 Martin Sapanjo PPRA
76 Gilbert C. Kamunde PPRA
77 Ernest Laitun MoF
78 IngiahediNduma Chief Government Communication Government Communication Unit
79 Ramadhani O. Kissimba Government Communication Unit
80 Adolf Ndunguru Manager Tanzania Revenue Authority
81 Gloria Ngoitiko Accountant Tanzania Revenue Authority
82 Pius Mponzi Assistant Budget Commissioner Government Budget Division
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 62 | P a g e
Name of Person Position Institution
83 HariethChamuriho Assistant Director Government Assets Management Division
84 Sixbert H. Qamdiye Assistant Director Government Assets Management Division
85 Michael Lizigah SV Government Assets Management Division
86 HappygodLongino SV I Government Assets Management Division
87 SyprianIraba PFMRP III Focal Point MoE Ministry of Education
88 I. M Matovu District Executive Director Bagamoyo
89 Amir Kiluwasha Acting Treasurer Bagamoyo
90 Hildrgard H. Mselle Planning Officer Bagamoyo
91 TatuSelemani District Executive Director Kibaha
92 TheopisterMrango Acting District Treasurer Kibaha
93 Pascal M. Karomba Chief Accountant RAS Coast
94 Simon M. William Salary Accountant RAS Coast
95 Emmanuel S. Kwayu Accountant RAS Coast
96 Frank Y. Mchomvu Procurement Officer RAS Coast
97 Elly S. Mtilwa Accountant RAS Coast
98 SimaiSimai Focal Point Zanzibar AccGen Zanzibar
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 63 | P a g e
Appendix 5 – IPSASs selected extracts
Extracts from:
IPSAS 33 First-time Adoption of Accrual Basis International Public Sector Accounting Standards
(IPSASs) Exposure Draft, Final Pronouncement, January 2015
IPSAS 1, Presentation of Financial Statements
Comparative Information
Where a first-time adopter elects to not present comparative information, its transitional IPSAS financial
statements following the adoption of accrual basis IPSASs or its first IPSAS financial statements
presented in accordance with this IPSASs shall include:
(a) One statement of financial position, and an opening statement of financial position at the date of
adoption of accrual basis IPSAS;
(b) One statement of financial performance;
(c) One statement of changes in net assets/equity;
(d) One cash flow statement;
(e) A comparison of budget and actual amounts for the current year as a separate additional financial
statement or as a budget column in the financial statements if the first-time adopter makes its approved
budget publicly available; and
(f) Related notes and the disclosure of narrative information about material adjustments as required by
paragraph 142.
IPSAS 24, Presentation of Budget Information in Financial Statements
Paragraph 55 is amended and paragraph 55A is added as follows:
Effective Date
55. When an entity adopts the accrual basis IPSASs of accounting as defined in IPSAS 33, First-time
Adoption of Accrual Basis International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSASs) for financial
reporting purposes subsequent to this effective date, this Standard applies to the entity’s annual financial
statements covering periods beginning on or after the date of adoption of IPSASs.
55A. Paragraph 55 was amended by IPSAS 33, First-time Adoption of Accrual Basis International Public
Sector Accounting Standards (IPSASs) issued in January 2015. An entity shall apply that amendment for
annual financial statements covering periods beginning on or after January 1, 2017. Earlier application is
permitted. If an entity applies IPSAS 33 for a period beginning before January 1, 2017, the amendment
shall also be applied for that earlier period.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 64 | P a g e
Appendix 6 – Progress in the PFMRP IV Outputs
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
KRA 1 Revenue Management:
Strengthened systems, processes and procedures for improving the operational capability of the revenue collection by June 2016
1.1: Improved quality of forecasting of fiscal aggregates for three years on a rolling basis
Aggregate revenue out-turn compared to original approved budget (PEFA: PI-3)
Actual domestic revenue collection was below 92% of budgeted domestic revenue estimated in no more than one of the last three years. (PEFA: C)
Actual domestic revenue collection is below 94% of budgeted domestic revenue in no more than one of the last three years. (PEFA: B)
1.1.1 Undertake a study to identify ways of improving tax revenue forecast and action plan by June 2014 [Originally milestone stated ‘Study on forecasting targets and actual revenue collection by Jun 2013’]
Sep 2012 JSM – Needed revision.
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Not achieved - the milestone was not undertaken as it was effectively replaced by a similar activity identified in TRA’s corporate plan. However another activity was undertaken instead where training to 15 staff on macroeconomic diagnostic was conducted in December 2013.
A measurable input milestone.
There is a potential for assistance to be given to the Policy Analysis Department (PAD) in the development of a model for use in revenue forecasting.
Increase in number and quality of participating MDAs and LGAS with
Less than 5% of participating MDAs and LGAS providing accurate, realistic revenue
50% of participating MDAs and LGAs providing accurate, realistic revenue
1.1.2 A team of trainers in revenue forecasting developed by June 2014 (milestone to be reviewed in line with
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Achieved - A team of 5 trainers was trained in May 2014.
Insufficiently specified measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 65 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
staff capable providing accurate, realistic revenue projections
projections in 2010/11
projections by 2017
recommendations from the study)
Not reported
1.2: The Government improves efficiency in domestic revenue mobilization both at the policy and the administration levels by updating legal instruments towards international best practices
Increase in collection of Total and non-tax revenues as percentage of GDP
Total revenue collection was 16.5 % of GDP in 2010/11
Total revenue collection will be at least 17.8% of GDP by 2013/14
1.2.1 The study on Non Tax Revenue (NTR)-“Integration and Harmonization of Revenue Collection Systems” completed by November 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved- the study was undertaken and a report produced in July 2013.
A measurable input milestone.
Non-tax revenue was 1.2% of GDP in 2010/11
Non-tax revenue will be at least 1.9% of GDP by 2013/14
1.2.2 Action plan to implement the recommendations from review of non-tax collection developed by June 2015 [Original target Jun 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track (but target date moved to Jun 2015)
Achieved –Action plan developed in January 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
1.2.3 Costed action plan incorporated in FY2015/16 for implementation
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Uncertain - Activity undertaken under each Ministry to actualize the action
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 66 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending 1.2.2
plan recommendations.
1.2.4 Submission of a bill to Parliament to enact Tax Administration Act for the purpose of establishing a common tax procedure among different taxes collected by Tanzania revenue authority (TRA) by Feb 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – At risk
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – Tax Administration Act and VAT Act passed in November 2014.
A measurable input milestone.
1.2.5 Review Laws, rules and Regulations for Local Government revenue system to improve LGA’s own sources in line with best practices by June, 2016.
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk – With 1.3.6
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
In progress - Zero draft of LGA finance act developed before Dec 2014.
A measurable input milestone.
1.2.6 Take policy action to improve revenue mobilisation from natural resource
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Delayed – All activities not yet completed
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 67 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
sectors by June 2014 Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
1.2.? The action plan to implement the recommendations from review of non tax collection developed and implemented by 2016 [Deleted milestone]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Deleted milestone
Deleted – Reason not established
A measurable input milestone deleted.
1.2.7 Computerized revenue collection to at least 50% from MNRT[participating MDAS and LGAs] by 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain – Some revenue collection systems have been computerised but the percentage of total collection is not reported.
A measurable output milestone.
Tax exemptions as a percentage of GDP
2.2% Target :
2012: 1.9%
2013: 1.6%
2014: 1.2%
1.2.8 Review the current system of tax exemptions with the value-added Tax (VAT) regime and amend the VAT Act with a view to be in line with international best practices by November 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Achieved -VAT Act was passed in November 2014.
A measurable input milestone.
Indicator targets not converted to milestones.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 68 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
1.3: Strengthened capacity of local government authorities to collect revenue by 2015
Local Government Own source revenue to GDP
Actual revenue collection by LGAs 2010/11: TZS 158,280 million and 0.46 % of GDP
Local Government Own source revenue will be 1.5% of GDP
1.3.1 Completed assessment and evaluation of revenue potential for all major own sources of revenue to all LGAs by June 2014 [Original target June 2013]
Transferred to 6.1.1
1.3.2 Local Authorities Tax administration teaching and practice modules established and TOT completed for all finance management staff at the regional level by June 2014. [Original target June 2013]
Transferred to 6.1.2
1.3.3 PMO - RALG staff and Finance Management Officers at RS to be trained in tax revenue plans and budgets to spearhead LGAs tax reviews and reforms. June 2014 [Original target June 2013]
Transferred to 6.1.3
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 69 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
1.3.4 Four (4) Revenue Accountants, 3 Council management team members and 1 FMO from each LGA and RS are trained on own source revenue management by June 2014.
Transferred to 6.1.4
1.3.5 Establishment of known and clear revenue data base by each source of revenue, presence of trained personnel and a clear follow up arrangement at PMORALG and RS levels by June, 2015 [Original target June 2014]
Transferred to 6.1.5
Local Government legislation reviewed by 2016 (Act No. 7, 8 and 9)
The last amendment of the Local Government Finances Act No.9 of 1982 was done in year
Local Government Finances Act No. 9 reviewed by 2014
1.3.6 Completed study on the effectiveness, relevancy and sufficiency of the provisions of the Local Government Finances Act No. 9 by June,
Transferred to 6.1.6
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 70 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
2002. The act does not adequately address issues of equity, change of technology and other administrative issues to enhance local revenue mobilization considering the present and future LGAs circumstances.
2014
1.3.7 A bill for an act to amend the Local Government Finances Act No.9 of 1982 is finalized and submitted to the Cabinet by Nov 2014 [Original target Feb 2014]
Transferred to 6.1.7
1.3.8 Improvement of Financial Management in LGAs by June 2015
Transferred to 6.1.8
1.4: Increase of donor funding that flows through the exchequer system by 2016
Percentage of disbursement of direct project fund portfolio via the exchequer
20% 50% 1.4.1 National framework for managing development co-operation (Development Cooperation Framework, DCF) reviewed, disseminated and put in operation by March 2014 [Original target Dec 2012]
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved but delayed – Drafting was undertaken 2013/14. Stakeholder consultation between Jul and Dec 2014.
Still waiting for consideration of the drafted framework to be included in the
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 71 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
IMTC agenda.
1.4.2 Revised [JAST and] AMP user guideline clearly communicated to both parties by Dec 2014 [Original target Dec 2012]
Sep 2012 JSM – Needed revision
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Achieved but delayed – Training delivered Feb 2015 followed by the upgrade for July 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
1.4.3 Analysis of trends of the direct project fund portfolio disbursed via the exchequer system published and shared annually by June 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved – The reports have been produced for each year since 2013 but the reports take a year to prepare.
On the face of it an insufficiently specified output milestone. It appears to actually refer to the production of analysis reports which is a measurable output milestone.
KRA 2 Budgeting and planning:
Strengthened capacity of planning and budget management, including results and program based budgeting, within MOF, MDAs and LGAs by June 2016.
2.1: Strengthened capacity of MDAs, RSs and LGAs in implementing program
Presence of Programs-based budget classification (PI-5)
The 2008/09 budget formulation and execution is based on administrative and GFS –
The budget formulation and execution will be based on administrative , economic and functional
2.1.1. All sub programs, objectives and performance indicators defined by Dec 2012
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
Partially achieved – The indicators were defined but it has been agreed that they require further revision.
A measurable input milestone.
The 2013 JSM should have reported this milestone as delayed.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 72 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
based budgeting by June 2016.
compatible economic classification. There is no COFOG-based functional classification and budget documentation and reporting system (PI-5C)
classification
(Using at least the 10 main COFOG functions), using GFS/COFOG standards or a standard data can produce consistent documentation according to those standards
(PI-5B)
2.1.2. Chart of accounts Modified to accommodate program based budgeting by August 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – The coding structure was modified to accommodate the change from EPICOR 7 to 9.
A measurable output milestone.
2.1.3. MTEF reviewed to make program based budget compatible by September 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Undertaken for 8 pilot ministries but role out to all ministries not yet agreed with AFRITAC.
A measurable input milestone as the MTEF is changed.
2.1.4. Progress on the PBB Action Plan implementation annually
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Not achieved – A formal annual review of performance is not undertaken.
An insufficiently specified output milestone.
Increase in number of MDAs and RSs with skilled staff for
In 2011, there are no staff in MDAs and RSs with necessary skills to
95 % of MDAs and RSs have staff with necessary skills to implement
2.1.5. Completed phased training for all MDAs and RSs by Sept 2016 [Original target 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR –
At risk – On hold waiting for the roll-out of milestone 2.1.3.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 73 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
implementing a program based budgeting
implement program based budgeting
program based budgeting
On track
2.1.6. Completed phased training for all LGAs by Sept 2016 [Original target 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
At risk – On hold waiting for the roll-out of milestone 2.1.3.
A measurable input milestone.
2.2: Increased effective utilization of Planning and budgeting tools by 2016
Percentage increase in number of MTEF budgets meeting the MTSPBM requirements by 2016
In 2011, less than 75% of MTEF budgets are meeting the standards of MTSBM
98% of MTEF budgets are meeting the MTSPBM standards
2.2.1 MTSPBM reviewed by Dec 2014 [Original target Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Delayed – A draft manual has been completed but is delayed by the lack of formal approval.
A measurable input milestone.
2.2.2 Sixty MDAs, 21 RSs and 133 LGA trained in MTSPBM by Dec 2014 [Original target Jun 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed with revised target date
Delayed – Training cannot take place on an unofficial manual.
A measurable input milestone.
2.2.3 Reviewed MTSPBM to be applied during FY 2014/15 [Original
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM –
Partially implemented – It cannot be fully implemented since
An unmeasurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 74 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
target 2013/14] On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
milestone 2.2.1 has not been achieved. The unofficial manual is being used to influence the content of the annual guidelines.
2.2.4 Annexes to budget book volume II for Executive Agencies completed by June 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – This requires a software change that has not yet taken place.
A measurable output milestone.
Uncertain as to how this milestone relates to the achievement of the overall output.
Orderliness and participation in the annual budget process by 2016 (PI-11)
i) A comprehensive budget calendar exists but delays are sometimes experienced. MDAs have 6 – 8 weeks to submit their budget
ii) A comprehensive budget circular and budget
i)A clear annual budget calendar exists, is generally adhered to and allows MDAs enough time (at least six weeks from receipt of budget circular) to meaningfully completes their detailed estimates on
2.2.5 Action plan on implementation of recommendations on budget legal framework completed by xxx (revised date) [Original target Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – Budget Act passed in Oct 2014.
A measurable input milestone.
2.2.6 At least 10 PER Main Dialogue meetings held by June 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
On track – PER Champions Group created with a secretariat. 7 PERs so far.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 75 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
preparation guidelines are issued but the MDAs ceilings are not always approved by cabinet before issue (B)
time
ii) A comprehensive and clear budget circular is issued to MDAs which reflect ceilings approved by cabinet or equivalent prior to the circular distribution to MDAs(A)
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Expect to exceed the target by June 2016.
Percentage reduction in deviation of actual expenditure from approved budget
In 2011, the percentage of deviation of actual recurrent expenditure MDAs budget at vote level compared to approved budget but excluding salary
adjustments, contingency and debt service was at 13.7%
Actual expenditure deviated from budgeted expenditure by an amount equivalent to not more than 10%
2.2.7. Phased training to MDAs, RSs and LGAs Budget Committees on resource prioritization and planning
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
At risk but partially achieved. No training delivered to MDAs. Training of LGA committee members undertaken in Mar 2015.
Anunmeasurable input milestone that has no deadline.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 76 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Quality and timeliness of in-year budget report (P-24) by 2016
Comparison to budget is possible only for main administrative headings. Expenditure is captured either at commitment or at payment stage (not both)
Reports are prepared quarterly (possibly excluding first quarter), and issued within 8 weeks of end of quarter
There are some concerns about the accuracy of information, which may not always be highlighted in the reports, but this does not fundamentally
Classification allows comparison to budget but only with some aggregation. Expenditure is covered at both commitment and payment stages.
Reports are prepared quarterly and issued within 6 weeks of end of quarter
There are some concerns about
the accuracy, but data issues are generally highlighted in the reports and do not compromise overall consistency/usefulness (B)
2.2.8. Mechanism for quality assurance of Quarterly Budget Performance Reports (level of detail, timeliness, accuracy, consistency and usefulness to decision makers, as well as for budget transparency to citizens) established by June 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – On track but needs clarification re ‘mechanism for quality assurance’.
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Deleted – The component management decided it was inappropriate to monitor themselves.
Anunmeasurable input milestone.
This was not on track for 2013 JSM and is not reported on in the latest MYPR.
This deletion indicates that effective management of the quality of these performance reports is at risk.
Increase budget credibility (Minimise deviations in Aggregate Out-turn and Composition Variance)
2.2.9. Budget reallocation warrants published by September every year.
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved – As per the revised budget calendar this is published in June each year.
A measurable input milestone.
2.2.10. Government approves actions for improving budget credibility based on a review of reallocation
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM –
Not achieved – The reallocation for the four years is available and published but the
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 77 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
undermine their basic usefulness (C+)
warrants in the past four years - by June 2014
New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
review to establish potential improvements has not been undertaken and is unscheduled.
2.3: Strengthened capacity of LGAs for MTEF preparation by 2015
Comprehensiveness of information included in budget documentation (PI-6)
Currently there no sufficient information on LGAs revenue planning and budgeting which is included in the budget documentation.
Supportive and verifiable revenue data and information to be included in the LGAs budget documentation.
2.3.1. Proposal for budget information to be included in the Budget guideline to be submitted to National Budget Guideline committee by October annually
Transferred to 6.2.1
2.3.2. Recommendations of various studies on LGAs budget allocation formulas reviewed by January 2014
Transferred to 6.2.2
Various studies in fiscal transfers and decentralization process in Tanzania
Currently budget allocation formula follow, population, land area and poverty level,
Budget allocation formula reflects resource needs, distances from service
2.3.3. Agreement on improvement of LGAs budget allocation formulas among the Sector Ministries (PMO-RALG, MOF, PO-PSM and Sectors)
Transferred to 6.2.3
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 78 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
indicates that Budget allocation to LGAs reflects a more inequitable distribution of resources to LGA, and that the allocation formulae are not fully applied. There is a need to revisit all the existing budget allocation formulae to clearly reflect equitable allocation of financial resources by June 2016.
facilities, special area diseases, number of projects to be implemented, number of orphans etc.
completed by June, 2014
2.3.4. All LGAs budget allocation formulae reviewed by June, 2014
Transferred to 6.2.4
2.3.5. All reviewed LGA budget allocation formulae applied in the budget preparation during 2014/15 for the FY 15/16 budget.
Transferred to 6.2.5
2.3.6. Monitoring arrangements in place for measuring deviations in actual releases against all formula-based allocations to LGAs for FY 15/16.
Transferred to 6.2.6
2.4: Quality and comprehensiveness of budget
Public Access to key fiscal information
2.4.1. Public Access to key fiscal information: Timely publication of key fiscal information as
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 79 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
documentation as well as public access to key fiscal information (shifted from KRA 5.4)
listed below:
a. Budget guidelines published by December every year
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved for the past 3 financial years.
A measurable output milestone.
2.4.1. b. Executive budget proposal (Vol. I to IV) as submitted to Parliament published by June every year
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved for the past 3 financial years. Vol. II does not yet include the Executive Agencies
A measurable output milestone.
2.4.1. c. Approved budget (all volumes) published by September every year [Originally milestone stated ‘The approved national budget is published on MoF website by September
Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved for the past 3 financial years.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 80 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
each year’]
2.4.1. d. Quarterly budget execution report published within a month after end of quarter.
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved for the past 3 financial years.
A measurable output milestone.
2.4.1. e. Year-end budget execution report published by October every year [Originally milestone stated ‘A year-end report (budget outturn) comparing the actual budget execution to the enacted budget is published on MoF website by October each year.]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved for the past 3 financial years.
A measurable output milestone.
2.4.1. f. Citizen’s budget published by November every year
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Achieved for the past 3 financial years.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 81 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
2.4.2. Action plan for improving quality and comprehensiveness of budget documentation based on PEFA assessment developed – by December 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Delayed – Component manager indicates that the PFMRP Secretariat is expected to prepare this plan.This appears to have not been undertaken.
A measurable input milestone.
2.4.3 Changes in quality and comprehensiveness of budget documentation reflected in 2014-15 budget documentation
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Delayed – Component manager is expecting the PFMRP Secretariat to co-ordinate input from the various MoF departments involved.This appears to have not been undertaken.
An unmeasurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 82 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
KRA 3 Budget Execution, Accountability and Transparency:
Improved utilization of public resources in a more effective, efficient and transparent manner by June 2016
3.1:Strengthened public sector procurement by June 2015
Number of Public procurement regulations issued
Number of Skilled procurement staff
None( to be established after baseline study)
None( to be established after baseline study)
% increase in number of Public procurement regulations issued
% increase in number of skilled Procurement personnel in PEs
3.1.1. Action plan for implementing PPA is developed by Dec 2014 [Original target Dec 2012]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Not achieved - No action plan available. Responsibility for milestone uncertain.
A measurable input milestone.
3.1.2. New public procurement regulations prepared and issued by June 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved. One would expect this milestone to be dependent on the completion of the previous milestone. However the regulations were completed and published in Dec 2013.
A measurable output milestone.
3.1.3. Procurement training needs assessment exercise completed by Dec 2014. [Original target was Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved for LGAs. The TNA was completed in Aug 2014.
Achieved but delayed for GoT. The TNA was
A measurable input milestone.
There should be separation of MDAs and RSs results from LGAs results in separate milestones to
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 83 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
completed in May 2015.
show actual achievement.
3.1.4. [300] procurement staff trained on public procurement by June 2017 as per TNA
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending 3.1.3
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
In progress - Plans have been developed for two phases. The first for LGAs and the second for GoT. Expected to start phase 1 in Aug 2015.
A measurable output milestone.
3.1.5. Strategy to develop Procurement Management Unit (PMU) structures in Public Sector by June, 2015 [Originally milestone stated ‘Strategy on public procurement human resource developed and disseminated by Jun 2015]
Sep 2012 JSM – Needed revision
Sep 2013 JSM – On track, milestone revised
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved but of uncertain status. A report with recommendations was produced in July 2013. Next steps appear yet to be developed.
A measurable input milestone.
3.1.6. Procurement and supplies staff database maintained and updated by December, 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
At risk but in progress. Database has been developed and is being
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 84 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
populated.
Presence of procurement policy draft by June, 2013
None National procurement policy developed and disseminated to stakeholders
3.1.7. National procurement policy draft finalized by Dec 2014 [Original target Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Delayed - A procurement policy has been drafted (before Nov 2014) but the PPPD has yet to be asked to present the policy to the IMTC.
A measurable output milestone.
3.1.8. Stakeholders’ comments incorporated by June, 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved - Stakeholder comments incorporated in the policy to be presented to IMTC.
A measurable output milestone.
PPPDs’ capacity enhanced by June, 2013
None i) Motor vehicle and office equipment acquired
3.1.9. PPPDs’ capacity enhanced by June 2017 [Original target was Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain - The milestone to be measured has not beendefined.
An unmeasurable output milestone.
ii) Short training for 20 members of PPPD staff
3.1.10. Twenty (20) members of PPPD staff equipped with
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM –
Partially achieved - 14 staff being involved in
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 85 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
conducted skills on public policy formulation, implementation and evaluation by June, 2014
On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
international training and study tours.
National procurement policy and procurement law synchronised
None
Public Procurement Act 2011 reviewed
3.1.11. National procurement policy developed and shared by December, 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
Delayed. As for 3.1.7. a draft procurement policy has been drafted (before Nov 2014) but the PPPD has yet to be asked to present the policy to the IMTC.
A measurable input milestone.
Stakeholders acquainted with the National procurement policy
None
800 Stakeholders acquainted with the National procurement policy
3.1.13. Printing and uploading the NPP on the website by June, 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Delayed. NPP not yet approved.
A measurable output milestone.
National procurement policy strategy in place by December,
None National procurement policy strategy implemented
3.1.12. National procurement policy strategy developed and implemented by June 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Delayed. NPP not yet approved.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 86 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
2013 On track
3.1.14. National procurement policy and procurement law synchronised by June, 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
Delayed. NPP not yet approved.
An unmeasurable output milestone.
3.1.15. Monitoring the implementation of the National procurement policy by June, 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed. NPP not yet approved
An unmeasurable output milestone.
3.1.16. Evaluation and feedback of the implementation of the National procurement policy by June, 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
At risk. NPP approval delayed.
An unmeasurable output milestone.
3.1.17. 1000 Stakeholders acquainted with the national procurement policy by June, 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
At risk. NPP approval delayed.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 87 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
3.1.18 Strategy on raising stakeholders’ awareness on contract award, complaints/disputes developed and implemented by Jun 2016 [New milestone]
Dec 2014 MYPR – New milestone on track
In progress. Several stakeholders’ meetings held. Strategy document not made available.
A measurable input milestone.
3.2:Strengthened capacity of MDAs, RSs and LGAs in cash management by 2015
Increase in number of staff with adequate skills on cash management
10 staff with cash management skills
610 staff with cash management skill
3.2.1. 600 staff of MDAs and LGAs trained on cash management using standardized materials by June 2015 [Original target was Jun 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Partially achieved – 346 staff trained from MDAs. The LGA training remains outstanding.
A measurable output milestone.
Decrease in the aggregate number of bank accounts operated by LGAs by 2015.
The aggregate number of bank accounts operated by LGA are 4,736 in 2011
3938 bank accounts will be closed by December 2013
3.2.2. Six bank accounts operated by each LGAs by December 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – The LGAs have been restricted to six bank accounts in 2012/13.
A measurable output milestone.
Strengthen monitoring of payment
3.2.3. ACGEN to present a monthly report on payment
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed
Achieved with effect from Dec 2013.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 88 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
arrears arrears to ceiling committee effective Dec 2013
milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
3.3: Strengthened public debt management capacity by 2015
Recording and management of each cash balance, debt and debt guarantees (P1-17) by 2016
i) The various databases containing debt data are currently in the process of being merged. Data quality is considered fair and minor reconciliation problems occur. For the data entered in CS DRMS, statistical reports are regularly produced (B)
ii) The balances of several government bank accounts in commercial
i) Domestic and foreign debt records are complete, updated and reconciled on a monthly basis with data considered of high integrity. Comprehensive management and statistical reports (cover debt service, stock and operations) are produced at least quarterly (A).
ii) Calculations and consolidation of
3.3.1 The agreed actions arising from the Feb. 2012 World Bank debt management report shared with key stakeholders by July 31, 2012 (Milestones to be reviewed)
Sep 2012 JSM – Delayed
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – WB debt Management Report shared with key stakeholders in financial year 2013/14.
A measurable input milestone.
3.3.2 Debt management policy developed and shared by June 2014 [Original target was Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – Debt Management Policy developed in June 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
3.3.3 Capacity of 50 Public Debt management staff enhanced to undertake DSA on external, domestic
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Not achieved and not on track – There has been no activity on this milestone.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 89 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
banks are not consolidated, though there is a plan to do so (D).
iii) Contracting of loans and issuing guarantees is approved by Minister of MOF in line with rules, but there are no ceilings (C)
most government cash balances take place at least monthly, but the system used does not allow consolidation of bank balances (C).
iii) Central Government’s contracting of loans and issuance of guarantees are made within limits for total debt and total guarantees (B).
debt and contingent liabilities by June 2014.
On track
3.3.4 Review of Government Loans, Guarantees and Grants Act by June 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
Delayed in progress – the Government Loans, Guarantees and Grants Act was reviewed and the proposed amendments were prepared in June 2015. It is still waiting for IMTC approval.
A measurable input milestone.
3.3.5 Debt Management department established by June 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
In progress – The approval for the establishment of the department was given in May 2014. It is expected the department will commence operations in July 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
Management of risk emanated
Quarterly detailed report
3.3.6. Quarterly monitoring of
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently
Not Achieved – Not yet
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 90 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
from Contingent liabilities created by PA & OB's by June 2017
on public debt published on disclose on its website with information on both domestic and external debt, all outstanding loans guarantees granted by the GOT, all liabilities of those PA&OBs owned by the GOT, and outstanding borrowings by PA&OBs from the Public Pension Funds with GOT guarantee
contingent liabilities of PA&OBs
developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track given as 3.4.6
undertaken.
3.3.7. Annual monitoring of guarantees approved by GoT for PA&OBs and for PPP financed projects
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track given as 3.4.7
Not Achieved – Not yet undertaken.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
3.3.8. Detailed and quarterly debt report prepared and published.
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – The quarterly reports are prepared a month after end of each quarter and is available in the MoF website. Latest report is for March 2015
A measurable output milestone.
3.4: Improved Quality and i) Central i) Central 3.4.1 Completed Sep 2012 JSM – Uncertain – A measurable input
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 91 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
integrity and content of government financial statements and the migration from IPSAS cash to IPSAS accrual accounting for all government accounts is progressing in accordance with plans.
timeliness of annual financial statements (PI-25)
Government final accounts include revenue, expenditure and bank balances, and since 2007/08 data on most financial assets and liabilities are disclosed with few exceptions. (B)
ii) Financial Statement are submitted for external audit within 6 months of the end of fiscal year. (A)
iii) Cash basis IPSAS has been applied since 2007/08. (B
Government final accounts disclose full information on revenue, expenditure and bank balances, financial assets and liabilities (A)
ii) Target for 2013 -125 staff and 2014-125
iii) Financial Statements are submitted for external audit within 6 months of the end of fiscal year. (A)
IPSAS applicable to all financial statement
review of the IPSAS guideline issued by PMORALG in 2008/09 to accommodate the recent IPSAS updates by June 2013
On track
Sep 2013 JSM – At risk
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
ACGEN agreed transfer of milestone to PMO-RALG during 2012/13
milestone.
3.4.2 Training to the MDAs, RSs and LGAs accounting officers to develop awareness on IPSAS Accrual by June 2014 [Original target was 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – Started
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed but achieved. Training delivered in Jan 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
Certainly delayed Dec 2014 MYPR is in error.
3.4.3 Capacity building to 250 staff from MDAS and RSs and Embassies to enhance skills in IPSAS accrual by 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved. Training delivered.
A measurable input milestone.
3.4.4 Public Finance Act of 2001 and Regulations reviewed to address migration to IPSAS accrual by June 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain – Draft revisions and regulations have not been produced.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 92 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
3.4.5 Consolidated template of financial statements to include MDAs, RSs, LGAs, Controlled entities &GBEs developed by June 2016 [Original target was by 2016]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved - A template developed and used for 2013/14 financial statements.
A measurable output milestone.
Stage of the transition confirmed against approved action plan.
Reports of the Auditor General confirm improvement
The decision to transition all government accounts to full accrual accounting has been made but detailed action plan has not been finalized or approved.
2009-10 Government accounts received an adverse opinion.
Central Government final accounts include revenue,
IPSAS Accrual migration action plan has been completed approved and is in process of execution.
Implementing migration plan as targeted.
Quality and integrity of government financial statements is improved as evidenced by the reports of the Auditor General
3.4.6. 250 government accountants in MDAs /LGAs trained in IPSAS accrual and accrual modules for Epicor by September 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Not achieved – No money spent and no evidence of training having been given made available.
A measurable input milestone.
3.4.7. Plan for migration towards IPSAS Accrual accounting is completed by December 2013.
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Achieved but the plan is not widely shared and only used by the ACGEN for internal review.
A measurable output milestone.
3.4.8. Plan is approved for execution and stakeholder information sessions have been completed by January 2014.
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Uncertain since the plan is not widely shared and reviewed.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 93 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
expenditure and bank balances, and since 2007/08 data on most financial assets and liabilities are disclosed with few exceptions. (B)
Financial Statement are submitted for external audit within 6 months of the end of fiscal year. (A)
Cash basis IPSAS has been applied since 2007/08. (B)
Financial Statements are submitted for external audit within 6 months of the end of fiscal year. (A)
Not reported
3.4.9. All legislative and policy supports decisions have been identified by December 2014.
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain since the policy support decisions made have not been widely shared.
An unmeasurable output milestone.
3.4.10. Milestones for the transition have been identified and approved (e.g. Public Finance Act.2001 and Regulations amendments) by October 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain since the policy support decisions made have not been widely shared.
A measurable input milestone.
Latest MYPR should state pending 3.4.4
3.4.? Plan to integrate all RSs and LGAs operations into the centralised IPSAS accrual architecture is completed and PMO RALG is fully engaged as a stakeholder by Dec 2014 [Deleted milestone]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Deleted milestone
Milestone deleted. A measurable input milestone.
3.4.11. Consolidated Sep 2012 JSM – Considered on A measurable output
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 94 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
accounts with IPSAS Accrual by June 2017.
Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
track by ACGEN but the plan against which to measure performance is not shared.
milestone.
3.4.12. ACGEN to compile and produce financial statements disaggregated on the basis of economic classification and by sectors
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Uncertain – ACGEN asserts that this is a Budgeting Department milestone.
A measurable output milestone.
Production of outturn financial statements should be the responsibility of the ACGEN.
3.5: Improved accountability in management of Government Assets for supporting migration to IPSAS Accrual
Number of MDAs which are now reporting their financial position through IPSAS Accrual
Number of MDAs which have been
None
20 MDAs( 28%) have been valued and uploaded in EPICOR
% increase of MDAs reporting their financial position through EPICOR asset management module by 2016 (Targets to be set after migration action plan towards
3.5.1. Uploading of 70 additional MDAs in EPICOR by Jun 2017 [Original milestone stated ‘Uploading of 16 MDAs in Epicor by Dec 2012 first revised to Jun 2016]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with revised target
On track – 42 MDAs have been uploaded.
A measurable input milestone.
3.5.2. Asset management (tracking) software
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM –
Achieved – Software installed in 2013/14. The
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 95 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
IPSAS Accrual Accounting is completed)
% increase of MDAs valued and uploaded in EPICOR by June 2016 (Targets to be set after migration plan towards IPSAS Accrual Accounting is completed)
installed, tested and users are trained on use of software by June 2014. [Original milestone stated ‘Asset management (tracking) software acquired by Mar 2013’]
On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
training was undertaken in two phases 2013/14 for awareness creation and 2014/15 user training for regional stock verifiers.
Latest MYPR states on track but target date has passed. Therefore milestone is either achieved or delayed.
3.5.3. GAM capacity enhanced on asset management function by June 2016. [Original milestone stated ’40 staff (25 regional heads (RSVs) and 15 from HQ) trained on asset management by Dec 2013.]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved – GAM has received equipment, facilities and training .
An unmeasurable input milestone.
3.5.4. Asset Management Policy prepared and submitted by June 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Draft policy is with GAM awaiting development of implementation strategy.
A measurable input milestone.
3.5.5. Valuation of Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved - 51 A measurable output
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 96 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Government assets in 34 MDAs and RSs completed by June 2017 [Original target Jun 2016]
On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
MDAs have been completed.
milestone.
3.5.? Progress against target reported annually [Deleted milestone]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Deleted milestone
Milestone deleted. An unmeasurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 97 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight:
Improved adherence and enforcing of MDAs and LGAs to financial internal controls, rules, laws, regulations and audit recommendations by June 2016
4.1: Increased coverage and quality of the internal audit functions by 2016
Percentage increase in unqualified opinion in the external audit report for MDAs and LGAs
54% of MDAs and 65% LGAs obtained unqualified opinion in 2009/2010
65% MDAs and 75% LGAs will get unqualified opinion in 2015/2016
% of IAUs conforming with IAGD guidelines which are based on international standards
4.1.1. Operational plan developed and approved by June, 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved - Operational plan was launched Mar 2013. Approved plan was printed Jul 2013.
A measurable input milestone.
4.1.2. Internal audit manual/guidelines, standards and quality assurance improvement programme, which complies with international standards and best practices, will be in place by June 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved - IA charter, code of ethics, and manual developed and distributed 2012/13 Quality assurance improvement programme printed and distributed Dec 2012 Audit committee guidelines printed and distributed Dec 2013.
A measurable input milestone.
4.1.3. 450 Internal auditors trained Quality Assurance and Improvement
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Partially achieved and partially delayed- 375 committee
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 98 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Programme Procedures Manual by Jun 2016 [Original target Jun 2015
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with revised target
members from MDAs and RSs trained during 2014/15. No training given to internal auditors so far.
4.1.4. Independent quality assurance assessment of (Internal Audit Units) IAUS in MDAs and LGAs completed by June 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
Not achieved – This milestone’s activities are concerned with delivery of training and purchase of equipment not an independent assessment of quality assurance.
A measurable output milestone as stated but compromised by a set of activities of an input nature.
Effectiveness of internal audit (PI-21)
i) Internal audit function exists in most MDAs, and it is estimated that 20 percent of staff time is allocated to system based reviews and high risk areas (C)
ii) Reports are
i) Internal audit is operational for all Central and Local government entities, and generally meet professional standards.
ii) At least 50% of staff time is
4.1.5. Effective IAU and audit committee established and internal auditors conduct compliance audit and evaluate effectiveness of internal control in MDAs and LGAs by June 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain – The activities under this milestone are all training and workshop activities. There are no activities to measure effectiveness.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
4.1.6. The Pilot stage Sep 2012 JSM – Delayed – A measurable input
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 99 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
issued for Most MDAs but these are not copied to NAOT (C)
iii) To some degree actions are taken by management on major issues but often with delays (C)
allocated to system based reviews and high risk areas.
iii) Reports adhere to a fixed schedule and are distributed to the audited entity, Ministry of Finance and NAOT (B)
iv) Action by management on internal audit findings will be taken within one month after issuing a report and should be comprehensive across Central and Local government entities (B)
of Computerised Audit will be finalized by Jun 2015 [Original target Jun 2014]
On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with revised target
TeamMate has been purchased and 15 champions have yet be trained as trainers.
milestone.
4.1.7. Computerised Audit in place by Jun 2017 [Original target Jun 2016]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending with revised target
At risk – Due to delay in 4.1.6.
A measurable input milestone.
Technical Audits conducted for 20
70 Technical Audit
4.1.8. Technical Audits are conducted for 70
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
On track – 48 technical audits for
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 100 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Projects in 2011 conducted by 2016
Projects by June, 2016 [Original target Jun 2014]
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
projects have been carried out so far.
Ensure agreed corrective measures in response to audit findings are taken
31 (10%) IAUs in MDAs and LGAs have submitted quarterly reports with reference to CAG follow-up
% of MDAs and LGAs have submitted quarterly reports with reference to CAG follow-up
4.1.9. Implementation status of corrective measures for internal and external audits (CAG recommendations) submitted by all the IAUs in MDA/LGA to IAGD on quarterly basis by June 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – new milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
Delayed – Database to track audit recommendations is not yet completed. Improved format for quarterly reports has been developed and distributed.
A measurable output milestone.
Why is this milestone not linked to milestone 4.2.9?
Is what is essentially the same work being undertaken twice?
Improve adherence to financial regulations and controls - Continue to monitor compliance with IA benchmarks
Number of staff equipped with skills on risk-based audit
Capacity enhancement
100 staff trained in risk based internal audit
550 internal audit staff are trained in risk based audit
4.1.10. 550 internal auditors and other stakeholders trained in risk management process and risk based audit by June, 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved – 527 heads of department and audit committee members trained on risk management . 424 IAs trained on
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 101 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
on guidelines for Fraud Risk Management, Internal Control, Risk management Monitoring and Evaluation
risk based audit.
300 Accounting Officers, Head of Departments, Audit Committee members and internal Auditors on the guideline for Fraud Risk management, Internal control, Risk Management Monitoring and Evaluation
4.1.11. To train 300 Accounting Officers, Head of Departments, Audit Committee members and internal Auditors on the guideline for Fraud Risk management, Internal control, Risk Management Monitoring and Evaluation by June 2017
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
On track –The activities indicate only 200 persons to be trained. Training has been given during 2014/15 to 100 people on fraud risk management and internal control.
A measurable output milestone. The number of officers to be trained may need revision.
Study recommendations to inform next course of action
4.1.12. Study to assess the ICT needs for effective internal audit management and control by June 2015.
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
Delayed - The activity is being proposed to be changed to creation of awareness. JSC approval is awaited.
A measurable output milestone being changed to a measurable input.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 102 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
4.2: Strengthened External audit functions by 2016
NAOT reaches AFROSAI-E
Level 3
Level 2
NAOT did not reach at level 3 in 2010 as planned because of lacking two criteria. Out of 10 criteria, NAOT cleared 8 criteria. Other 2 criteria are (1) NAOT staff should not be Civil Servants, and (2) Appointment of CAG by the Parliament. The 2005 assessment scored NAOT as level 1.
A committee was formed to conduct legal review and will submit a report on needs of legal
NAOT to reach Level 3 by 2016
80% of Auditors to have be accommodated in own offices
800 Auditors trained on Risk Based Audit and 400 in IT audit
Five value for money audit reports to be produced each year by NAOT staff without technical assistance from external consultant
4.2.1. The committee report on needs of legal amendments (existing laws) to contribute towards reaching level 3 submitted to the attorney General and awareness by December 2012.
[This achieved milestone replaced by one below]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
This milestone was apparently achieved according to JSM reports but the achievement is actually at risk as described in the next milestone.
A measurable input milestone.
4.2.1 [New] Maintain and enhance CAG independence by Jun 2016
Dec 2014 MYPR – New milestone on track
At risk – The independence of the CAG has been compromised from a budget/financing perspective by the Budget Act 2014 which introduces a MoF budget review.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 103 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
amendments to reach at level 3.
The committee members visited South Africa, Kenya and Uganda.
Increase in number of NAOT staff capable of issuing audit reports as per international technical and professional practices
Capacity of NAOT audit service strengthened by 2016
Is this indicator target actually meant to be an unmeasurable milestone?
Value for Money Audits to be conducted by NAOT staff with minimum technical support by external Consultant
One VFM report is produced by NAOT staff each year without technical assistance by external Consultant
4.2.4. Three [Two (2)] Value for Money audit reports to be produced each year by NAOT staff without technical assistance from external consultant by 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with increased number i.e three
Achieved – NAOT has an average of producing 5 to 6 performance reports each year without technical assistance.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 104 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Adoption and application of International auditing Standards in all audit assignments
100 Auditors trained on Risk Based Audit
200 auditors trained on International standards on auditing (ISSAIs, IPSAS.ISSAIs,IFRS,ISA)
800 auditors trained on International standards of auditing and Full adoption of International audit standards
4.2.3. 300 Auditors trained on Risk Based Audit and 200 in IT audit by 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – 200 auditors trained on risk based audit by Dec 2014.
A measurable output milestone.
Latest MYPR states on track but information shows milestone to be delayed.
4.2.5. 600 [originally 300] Auditors trained on international standards of auditing and full adoption of International Audit Standards by Jun 2016 [Original target 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with increased targets
At risk – 300 auditors were trained by Dec 2014.
A measurable output milestone.
Most Auditors are accommodated in Auditees premises
4.2.2. 100% of auditors are moved from auditee premises to NAOT offices by 2015 [Original milestone stated ‘50% of auditors to be accommodated in NAOT own offices by 2014’]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed and partially achieved – Currently some 85% of auditors are out of auditee premises.
A measurable output milestone.
Number of All 86 MDA, 134 All MDA, LGAs 4.2.6. Closing of Sep 2012 JSM – Uncertain – A An unmeasurable
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 105 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
MDAs. LGAs and Parastatals reached for financial audit
LGAs and about 122 Parastatals were covered by Financial Audits.
and Parastatals are covered by Financial Audits by 2016
books of accounts for Parastatals harmonized and audit modalities agreed by 2016 [Original target 2014]
On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with revised target.
forum on the topic was held with CEOs of parastatals in Dodoma in Dec 2014.
input milestone.
Scope, nature and follow-up of external audit (PI-26) by 2016
i) In the last three years, the audit report, including consolidated financial statements of government, was presented to the legislature six months after the receipt of financial statements (B)
ii) No electronic system currently exists to consolidate and easily access data regarding outstanding audit findings and
i) Audit reports are submitted to the President within 9 months (per the Public Audit Act) of after the end of the financial year.
ii) Fully operational and easily accessible database to support Government’s efforts to reduce outstanding matters (findings and recommendatio
4.2.7. Audit methodology in line with ISSAIs guidelines adopted by June 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – Guidelines put in place during 2013/14
A measurable input milestone.
4.2.8. Scoping study to ascertain the parameters of the outstanding matters database is completed by Nov 2015 [Original target Nov 2012]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with revised target
Achieved – As per next milestone.
A measurable input milestone.
4.2.9. Establish a database that will separate findings (monetary and non monetary) and recommendations
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – At risk
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Achieved – A database has been developed and established.
A measurable output milestone.
Is this an overlapping milestone with milestone 4.1.9?
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 106 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
recommendations, including their age.
ns) .
including by age, and record follow up actions (i,e matters closing) by December 2013.
On track
Increased application of ICT in auditing and connectivity (by Wide Area Network ) of NAOToffices
20 staff trained on ICT application in auditing
600 Auditors trained on Audit Commanding Language (ACL) and other audit based software
4.2.10. 600 Auditors trained on audit commanding language (ACL) and other audit based software by 2014. [Originally targeted 200 auditors then 300 by 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with new target
On track and delayed – NAOT reports that more than 400 auditors have been trained in the last three years.
A measurable output milestone.
Target date needs revision. The NAOT indicates that it should be 2016.
NAOT offices are not connected
NAOT Headquarters is connected by all 21 regional offices using WAN by 2016
4.2.11. NAOT Headquarter is connected to 10 Regional offices using WAN by 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Achieved - 11 offices connected during 2013/14 with a further 8 during 2014/15.
A measurable output milestone.
It appears that this milestone needs revision since activity is ongoing.
One Team Mate module (Electronic working papers) is applied in auditing
All five Teammate modules applied in auditing by 2016
4.2.12. Two of five Team Mate modules applied in auditing by Jun 2016 [Original target Oct 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR –
On track – Total modules to be applied will be four of five and the pilot audits will be for 26 entities for FY
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 107 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
On track with revised target
2014/15 starting in Oct 2015.
4.3: Improved transparency on audit reports (central, local and parastatal levels) to strengthen scrutiny and accountability.
“Citizen Audit Report”(simplified audit reports accessible by the general public) are published
4 Consolidated audit reports (central, local, POABs and VfM/Performance) are publicly available on the NAOT website after tabling.
NAOT set up a booth at Trade Fair (SabaSaba) and Public service week where general audit reports are distributed to visitors.
All General audit reports are accompanied by a ‘citizens audit report’ (short summary of the key audit findings and recommendations, in both Swahili and English) and are available in a timely manner (within 4 weeks after tabling) on the NAOT website and at NAOT offices all over the country by 2016.
4.3.1. Citizen audit reports available for the 5 [revised from 4] General audit reports by Jun 2017[Original target June 2013] and onwards on annual basis.
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved and ongoing – Combined citizen reports have been prepared for 2011/12 and 2012/13 so far.
A measurable output milestone.
4.4: Improved performance of parastatals
Increase in number of Parastatals implementing
2 Parastatals (TRL & TPA) were implementing
All Parastatals will be implementing Performance
4.4.1 Ten Pilot Parastatals Signed Performance contracts with TR by Dec 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM –
Achieved with delay
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 108 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
by June 2016. performance contracts by June 2016
Performance contract in 2009
Contracts by June 2016
[Original target Jun 2013]
Pending
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved with delay
Oversight of aggregate fiscal risk from other public sector entities (PI-9) by 2016
Increase compliance rate on TR’s Act by Parastatals by June 2016
There is weak Monitoring of Parastatals as their final number is still to be established and their consolidated overview is missing.
Compliance rate on TR’s Act by Parastatals is below 70% in 2010/11 (PI-9: D)
All Parastatals will submit fiscal reports including audited account to TR and consolidates overall fiscal risk issues into an Annual TR Financial Statements (B)
Compliance rate on TR’s Act will be 100% by June 2016
4.4.2 Database on Parastatals set up and functioning by Dec 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Partially achieved – The TRIMS database has been developed but is not fully populated and hence not fully functional.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
4.4.? Monitoring framework for parastatals set up by Jun 2014 [Milestone combined with 4.4.3]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Deleted milestone
4.4.3 [M&E] mechanism for measuring Parastatals compliance rate set up [by June 2014], reviewed and implemented by June 2015.
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Tenders for the development of this mechanism were opened on the 15th July 2015.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Increase in revenue from
Revenue from Parastatals was 0.55 % of total
Revenue from Parastatals will be 4% of total
4.4.4 New TR's Bill presented to the Parliament by June
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Delayed – A study tour undertaken as a precondition set
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 109 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Parastatals as
percentage of approved domestic revenue collection
approved domestic revenue collection in 2010/11
approved domestic revenue collection by June 2014
2014 Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
by IMTC for the submission of this bill to Cabinet has yet to be completed.
4.4.5 150 Parastatals’ Acts Reviewed to be in line with the New TR Act by June 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
Delayed – This milestone is largely dependent on the completion of milestone 4.4.4
A measurable input milestone.
4.4.6 TR’s Office capacities enhanced by Jun 2015 [Original target Jun 2014]
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track with revised target
Ongoing – This milestone concerns human resource capacity building currently through the training of management analysts and department heads.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
4.5: Strengthened capacity of oversight functions of Parliamentary
Number of PAC members trained
Evidence of PAC members making follow-up on financial audit recommendatio
4.5.1. Capacity building interventions to PACs conducted annually [The word annually added to original milestone]
Sep 2012 JSM – Needed revision
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Uncertain – NAOT reports that various pieces of training have been conducted but the annual aspect has
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 110 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Accounts Committee in Tanzania Mainland
ns in the respective MDAs and LGA
On track not been confirmed.
4.6: Improved public procurement performance by PEs by 2015
Average level of compliance of
i) all procuring entities (for follow-up audits) and ii) the top 20 procuring entities with the (revised) Procurement Act 2011
Competition, value for money and controls in procurement (PI – 19)
Old target (63%+75%)/2=68%
i. 66 % of tenders under open tendering process
were advertised in fiscal year 2006/2007 (B)
Target will be based on new set of indicators +20% of baseline (new BL by October 2012)
i) Accurate data on the method used to award public contracts exists and shows that more than 75% of contracts above the threshold are awarded on the basis of open competition(A)
4.6.1. Annual PPRA audit results confirm positive trend on a yearly basis [Originally milestone was under output 3.1]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
On track - 50 PEs procurement Audits undertaken in FY 2014/15 with another 50 PE Audits ongoing
An imprecise measurable output milestone.
ii. Using less competitive procurement methods is allowed with
ii) Other less competitive methods when used are justified in
4.6.2. Revised procurement implementation and monitoring tools issued by March 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Achieved – Procurement implementation monitoring tools (standard bidding
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Latest MYPR states
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 111 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
justification. PPRA audits in 2008/09 show that the great majority of contracts now use the correct methods (B)
iii. A comprehensive complaints mechanism operates, but for unknown reasons the number of complaints has declined (B)
accordance with clear regulatory requirements (A)
iii) A process (defined by legislation) for submission and timely resolution of procurement process complaints is operative and subject to oversight of an external body with data on resolution of complaints accessible to public scrutiny (A)
[Original target was Dec 2013] [Originally milestone was under output 3.1]
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
documents and revised procurement guidelines) were reviewed in line with PPA 2011 and regulations in FY 2013/14.
on track but should apparently have stated achieved.
4.6.3. New Public Procurement Act, 2011, Regulations and Tools disseminated to major PEs and other key stakeholders by December 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved – PPA 2011, disseminated to 82 Board of Directors, 44 Accounting officers, 42 other staff for PEs and 261 staff from 43 MDAs and 9 LGAs.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
4.6.4. Procurement plans aligned with MDAs, LGAs and parastatal Institution Strategic plans by June 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Not reported
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Uncertain - This has been required by the PPA 2011 but we are not certain if the plans are actually aligned.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
4.6.5. Value for money procurement enhanced through Framework contract in
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM –
On track – Terms of reference and MTEF activities and inputs have
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 112 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
procurement of common use items and services by June 2017
On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
been submitted to PPPD and PFMRP Secretariat.
4.6.6. PPRA operational and outreach capacity strengthened by June 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
On Track – Renovation of building for coastal zone finalized by 30th June 2014. Building of two other zonal offices in FY 2014/15. Recruitment of 50 new staff in final stages.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Increase in number of PEs using e-procurement system (PMIS)
Currently, 203 PEs are using PMIS (Procurement Management Information System)
393 PEs will have a functional PMIS and pilot e-procurement system will start functioning by Nov 2016.
4.6.7 All (393) PEs will have a fully functional PMIS as a reporting tool for procuring entities to report back to PPRA by Nov 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Partially achieved and delayed- PMIS fully functional in 364 PEs with 733 registered users. 369 officers trained.
A measurable output milestone.
4.6.8 e-procurement will start functioning as pilot stage by Nov 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Delayed- ToRs for consultancy for preparation of detailed e-procurement prepared and
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 113 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
On track approved. Consultant being sought. Study tour done by Board in India on e-procurement experiences.
Increase in number of PEs reached for procurement audit
Currently 330 PEs have already been audited.
In June 2012 all 393 PE’s will be audited, then beyond F/Y 2012/2013 will be “Follow-up Audits
(should be repeatedly process especially on Top 20 PE’s
4.6.9. Completion of audits of one-third of all PEs annually (current total PEs: 493) [Originally milestone stated ‘393 PEs audited by Jun 2012’]
Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Delayed - 50 PEs procurement Audits undertaken in FY 2014/15 with another 50 PE Audits ongoing.
A measurable output milestone.
4.6.10. Follow up audit of 100 PEs to be done annually by 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
On track - 50 PEs procurement Audits undertaken in FY 2014/15 with another 50 PE Audits ongoing.
A measurable output milestone.
4.6.11. Annual Procurement Performance Evaluation Report prepared and published annually
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Achieved- the Annual Procurement Performance Report published for FY 2014/15.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 114 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Not reported
4.7: HCMIS is entrenched in service delivery points in selected sectors and its sustainability attained
HCMIS ownership at SDP for effective accountability, HR Management, Budget expenditure and Payroll in the relevant sectors.
Human error and checks and balances reinforced in the management of payroll through improved systems.
4.7.1. User requirements, gap analysis and Infrastructure requirements identified for 160 SDP undertaken by October 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain – The 160 service delivery points have not been identified.
A measurable input milestone.
Latest MYPR states on track but target date has passed. Milestone must be either delayed or achieved.
4.7.2. Installation of HCMIS at 160 SDP by June 2016
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain – The 160 service delivery points have not been identified.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 115 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management:
Improved management practices with increased accountability and leadership to better manage performance of PFMRP
5.1: Coordinate integration, interfacing and rationalization of government financial systems.
Interface central and local Government financial management system and tools
MDA /LGA IFMIS systems are not harmonized and or integrated and are not being centrally managed. Stand alone software continues to be acquired and implemented.
DFISM with overarching technical control for all government IFMIS systems is fully staffed and operational.
ICT Infrastructure capable of supporting approved systems architecture is in place
All Government financial systems (SBAS, PlanRep, RIMKU, IFMS) have been integrated and interfaced and financial data is
5.1.1. ICT mapping exercise showing location and owners of all and peri-financial software commenced with inception report published by December 2012. (refer PAF 2012)
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved but delayed - Mapping Study undertaken March 2014.
A measurable input milestone.
5.1.2. Stakeholder coordination meetings held to gather input and agree on cross functional responsibilities for financial systems planning held on by December, 2012
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved- it was reported that stakeholder meetings had taken place during 2013/14
An unmeasurable input milestone.
5.1.3. Sequenced, prioritized and costed action plan to bring all GoT financial and peri-financial software under one common government financial
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved but delayed – Costed action plan reported as having been developed during the first half of 2014/15
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 116 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
smooth exchanged between systems.
162 LGAs, 25 RSs and 3 institutions under PMO RALG connected with IFMIS by Dec.2015
systems architecture with supporting technical, infrastructure and management structures completed and approved by the GoT by June, 2013
5.1.4. Integration/ Interfacing plan is engaged and series of planned actions are being executed and completed by October, 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Not Achieved - Not yet undertaken.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
133 LGAs are connected to the IFMS
167 LGAs, 25 RSs and 3 institutions will be connected to the IFMS
5.1.5. IFMS infrastructure installed to new 35 LGAs, RSs and PMORALG institutions and connected to central server at Dodoma and MoF by Dec 2014 [Original target was 34 LGAs etc. by Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Installation consultants not yet contracted.
A measurable output milestone.
Latest MYPR states on track but target date has passed. Information given shows milestone is delayed.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 117 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Evidence of analytical reports generated from the system available at MDAs and LGAs level
133 LGAs, 21 RSs and 3 PMORALG institutions could produce.
Operation Reports, and
Management Reports
162 LGAs, 25 RSs and 3 Institutions will be able to produce;
Operation Reports
Management Reports
Final account reports (Financial Statements), and
Other reports like Council financial and development report s (CFR & CDR), MKUKUTA strategies implementation report by target, etc.
5.1.6. MoF IFMS (EPICOR) linked to PMO-RALG IFMS to the immediate capture of the Approved Budget and all Exchequer transfers to RSs and LGAs respectively by June 2014 [Original target Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved – Connection was made in 2013 and captures approved budget and all exchequer transfers to RSs and LGAs
A measurable input milestone.
5.1.7. Completed capacity building to key users of IFMS from all LGAs, RS and PMORALG institutions by June 2014 [Original target Jun 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Not Achieved – Activity not yet undertaken
An unmeasurable input milestone.
5.1.8. Audit of IFMIs in LGAs conducted by June 2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Not Achieved - Activity not yet undertaken
A measurable output milestone.
5.2: Utilization of EPICOR modules
Upgraded version of EPICOR with
EPICOR module are not fully
Upgraded EPICOR with ten modules in-
5.2.1. EPICOR system upgrade completed by
Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved
Achieved- Upgrade to version 9 undertaken in FY
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 118 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Increased from seven to ten
ten modules in-place. The new modules are:
Multi – Site Management.
Replication Server License.
Advanced Financial Report Designer
utilized place December 2014 Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
2012/13
5.2.2. ACGEN staff capacity enhanced by December 2014
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved – ACGEN trained 381 users on new version of EPICOR in FY 2014/15
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Latest MYPR states on track but target date has passed. Milestone must be either delayed or achieved.
5.2.3. Training for IFMS end users on the upgraded modules conducted by December 2014.
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Ongoing but delayed – ACGEN is currently undertaking end user training on the upgraded module.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Latest MYPR states on track but target date has passed. Milestone must be either delayed or achieved.
5.2.? EPICOR is able to provide real-time information to all LGAs on flow of funds by Jul
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM –
Milestone deleted. A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 119 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
2015. [Milestone deleted]
Milestone deleted
5.3: All software development and module upgrades are coordinated with the overarching plans for ICT integration.
Number of systems that are linked into an IFMIS platform and available for common use
ICT Planning is single purpose and not coordinated with other harmonization activities
All software development is integrated within a fully rationalized ICT architecture.
5.3.1. FISM is operationalized and controls are put in place to manage software acquisition and development by 2015. [Original target Dec 2012]
Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Not Achieved - Activity not yet undertaken
A measurable output milestone.
5.3.2. FISM staff capacity enhanced by June, 2015.
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Not Achieved - Activity not yet undertaken
An unmeasurable input milestone.
5.4: Improved communica-tion and public access to key fiscal information to stakeholders
Public access to key fiscal information:
1. Annual budget documentation,
2. In-year budget execution
The government makes available to the public 5 out of 6 types of information, but two of them are not complete: in-year budget execution reports and contract awards.
The government makes available to the public 5 out of 6 types of information- (A)
Special surveys undertaken within the last 3
5.4.? The approved national budget is published on MoF website by September each year
Subsumed under milestone 2.4.1
5.4.? Published citizen’s budget by November each year
Subsumed under milestone 2.4.1
5.4.? A year-end Subsumed under
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 120 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
reports,
3. Year-end financial statements,
4. External audit reports,
5. Contract awards,
6. Resources available to primary service delivery units (PI-10)
Resources available to primary service providers are not published (A)
Special surveys were undertaken within the last three years, but their results and methodologies used have not been seen (D)
years have demonstrated the level of resources received in cash and in kind by either primary schools or primary health clinics covering a significant part of the country OR by primary service delivery units at local community level in several other sectors (C)
report (budget outturn) comparing the actual budget execution to the enacted budget is published on MoF website by October each year.
milestone 2.4.1
5.4.1 Support the Budget Division and Policy Analysis Division to publish the relevant budget documents and fiscal information.
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – Revised milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Ongoing – Started later than expected due to funding delays. Expect to publish 2015/16 documentation in this year.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
5.4.2 MoF Communication Strategy developed and implemented by June 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Strategy has been developed but awaits official approval.
A measurable input milestone.
Latest MYPR states on track but target date has passed. Information given shows milestone is delayed.
5.4.5 Fiscal information and
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Achieved – Publish a summary report
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 121 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
budget transparency publication cycle developed and implemented by Jun 2014 [Milestone deleted and then reinstated]
Sep 2013 JSM – Not reported milestone deleted
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
every quarter.
Milestone appears to have been reinstated.
5.4.3 [or 6] Develop an action plan to modernise MoF website (structure, content and user friendliness) by June 2015 [Originally milestone stated ‘MoF website timely updated by Jun 2017’]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Funding allocated in 2015/16
A measurable input milestone.
5.5: Coordination and Standardization of PFM Training Achieved.
Number of trained staff in PFM
Quality of service delivery from trained staff.
........... of staff trained.
Presence of trained staff providing quality service.
5.5.1. Training mapping exercise completed by December 2012
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported on
Achieved but delayed – A mapping exercise for all MDAs and 14 RSs & 42 LGAs completed during 2013/14.
A measurable input milestone.
5.5.2. Capacity building plan developed and result measurement
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM –
Mostly achieved but delayed – Each component was expected to
A measurable input milestone but only if the milestone is tied to one component
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 122 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
framework shared with key stakeholders by Feb 2014 [Original target Jun 2013]
On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending on 5.5.3
prepare their own training plans. The MoF DAHRM submitted a plan for all of MoF during 2013/14.
manager not dispersed between several with the possibility of different levels of achievement.
5.5.3. An impact assessment of PFM training is conducted to measure staff performance following various trainings by June 2015 [Originally milestone stated ‘2 tracer studies conducted to measure impact of training and documented by Jun 2014 and Jun 2016.]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending to be revised
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Tenders for the work by a number of consultant firms are currently being evaluated. Since the necessary benchmarks have not been previously established it is expected that this will be more of a benchmarking exercise than an assessment of impact.
A measurable output milestone.
5.6: PFMRP component managers are being guided by detailed multi-year
Program components are completed in sequence based on priority and
PFMRP component activities are not always derived from and/or described within
PFM activities are governed by multi-year component operating plans that provide
5.6.1. All activities are presented for inclusion in PFMRP annual work plan are presented within the context of a detailed multi-year
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Achieved on an annual basis. – Work plans are produced.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 123 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
operating plans.
the reform is keeping pace with the agreed milestones
the context of detailed component operating plan
Relevance, sequence and costs are difficult to assess
context for relevance, sequence and cost.
operating plans annually [Original target Jun 2013]
Achieved
5.7: PFM activities are effectively planned and implemented
Component managers have capacity to develop and manage strategic operational plans.
Component managers have developed capacity in the use RBM methodology
Component managers have not had the necessary level of capacity development in strategic planning and results based management
150 staff from KRAs trained on change management and strategic planning.
60 staff trained on RBM methods
5.7.? Capacity building plan developed and shared with key stakeholders by Dec 2012 [Milestone deleted]
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Milestone deleted
Milestone deleted. A measurable input milestone.
5.7.1. Training on Change Management and Strategic Planning completed by Dec 2014 [Original target Dec 2013]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed with new target date
Achieved on an annual basis. The last course was May/Jun 2015
A measurable input milestone.
5.7.2. Results Based Management training has been delivered to 60 PFM RP Component managers by Jun 2014 [Original
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Achieved but delayed - Target date extended to Jun 2015.
Training was
A measurable output milestone.
Latest MYPR states on track but target
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 124 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
target Jun 2013] On track with new target date (sic)
undertaken Mar/Apr 2015
date has passed. Information given shows milestone is delayed.
5.8: Effective coordination of activities and support provided to the program implementers
Secretariat support is facilitating program performance.
Under resourced secretariat with short term contract
Functional secretariat providing a range of needs based program supports
5.8.1 Secretariat procurement process completed by July 2012
Sep 2012 JSM – Delayed
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved with delay
Achieved but delayed – The final member of the Secretariat was recruited Feb 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
2013 JSM states on track but target date had passed. Information given shows milestone was delayed but achieved late.
5.8.2 Secretariat work plan is completed annually alongside the PFMRP annual work plan [Milestone originally stated ‘Secretariat work plan is completed and approved by JSC by Dec 2012’]
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Achieved on an annual basis as part of MoF Planning Department’s annual plan.
A measurable input milestone.
5.8.3 PFMRP coordination secretariat facilitated
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM –
Uncertain – Facilitation through provision of office
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 125 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
annually On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
materials has been achieved but insufficient funding to facilitate M&E, communication work and capacity building.
5.9: PFM Program oversight and review is being guided by clearly defined milestones derived from an agreed M&E framework
Performance expectations for each component are clearly defined and understood by all stakeholders.
Performance expectations are not clear and the absence of context makes qualitative aspects of program oversight difficult.
Approved M&E framework sets out clear and relevant performance expectations
5.9.1. Annual review and amendment of the M&E framework to ensure ongoing congruence and relevance annually starting November 2012
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Achieved – The M&E framework is updated annually.
A measurable input milestone.
The framework is updated annually but it is not used to provide comprehensive progress reporting.
5.10: All major PFM reforms have been coordinated with and informed by the relevant government and DP stakeholder
Stakeholders have knowledge of reforms and change initiatives that will impact on them or their units and are collaborating
Coordination of major reforms with stakeholder groups is not prioritized. Significant information and capacity gaps exist.
Major PFM reforms are all supported by a communication / collaboration strategy which ensures that all stakeholders have the opportunity to
5.10.1. PFM information session completed to disseminate results of: ICT mapping exercise, ICT Harmonization Integration Plan by March 2013
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Not achieved – The mapping exercise was undertaken, but could not be used to produce the integration plan and no information sessions have been held.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 126 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
groups or supporting implementation.
Stakeholders have adequate time to develop the necessary adaptive capacity.
Change resistance is minimized
provide input and to receive necessary information in time to adapt to the change.
5.10.1a. IAG action plan, ACGEN’s Plan to transition to Accrual Accounting
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Uncertain – The ownership of this milestone is unclear.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
5.10.2. Dec.31st each year minimum of one PFM reform information day conducted for CSOs, DPs and GoT during Public Service day annually
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending
Not achieved – Milestone was only transferred to GCU in 2014/15 without funding.
A measurable input milestone.
5.11: PFMRP implemented efficiently and effectively through result based management approach.
Comprehensive annual work plan and budget
Progress report on place on 15th day after end of quarter
Strong and effective
Approved by August annually
Progress report in place
Weak dialogue structure
6 meeting
Work plans and budgets are approve by June annually
Funds are released by July 1/annually
Periodic report prepared quarterly
Presence of
5.11.1. PFMRP implemented according to annual work plan and milestones are being met
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Considered by the Secretariat as achieved by virtue of the Components’ Managers reporting . However the Secretariat believes it has no capacity to follow up.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 127 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
dialogue structure Number of coordinated dialogue meeting
strong and effective dialogue structure as per MoU.
Working Group and Joint Steering Committee meetings are attended by KRAs decision makers
KRA teams are meeting monthly schedule.
Donor representatives are well informed on reform initiatives.
5.11.2. Annual supervision missions are conducted by Sept 30 of each year commencing 2012
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Partially achieved – The JSC missions for 2012 and 2013 were held. The 2014 mission is overdue.
A measurable input milestone.
5.11.3. Independent program evaluations are completed towards end 2014/2015
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Independent review undertaken in Jul/Aug 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
5.11.4. Dialogue structures are working as evidenced by combined DP/GoT surveys/independent evaluations to ensure effective program implementation. [Original milestone specified ‘Survey 1 – March 2013 / Survey 2 – March 2015’]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Partially achieved – Surveys have not been undertaken only the current independent review.
A measurable output milestone.
5.11.? Surveys to ensure that teams
Sep 2012 JSM – Milestone deleted. A measurable output
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 128 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
(KRA teams, JSC members) are actually working are completed, Mar 2013, Mar 2015 and result informed to JSC for action. [Milestone deleted]
On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Deleted combined with 5.11.4
milestone.
5.12: National systems and processes for intergovernmental transfers to LGAs streamlined and rationalized
System and processes are documented with target timelines for each process step.
No overall view of systems and processes for intergovernmental transfers. Flow of funds and information on the same is not in parallel and tied to one system.
Effectiveness and efficiency of the system has increased
X XX Number of key actions implemented
5.12.1. TORs (for Streamlining and rationalizing National systems and processes for intergovernmental transfers to LGAs) completed by July 2012.
Sep 2012 JSM – Achieved
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved. A measurable input milestone.
5.12.2. Mapping commences September 2012
Sep 2012 JSM – Delayed
Sep 2013 JSM – Achieved
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved – The final report was produced in Sep2013.
A measurable input milestone.
Share of Non-salary (OC+DEV) funds released
In 2010 it took 7days for funds to reach MDAs and RSs (after
(Target to be set after mapping exercise)
5.12.3. Review and mapping of the systems and processes for
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM –
Achieved – The final report was produced in Sep 2013.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 129 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
to RSs and LGAs by end Q3, as percentage of the Resources budgeted and available (OC+DEV) for the year
receipt of complete set of fund request).
42.1% of resources available to RSs and LGAs at Q3
Decreased number of days of fund transfer time to RSs LGAs and MDAs
70% of resources available to RSs and LGAs at Q3 by 2014
intergovernmental transfers initiated with inception report finalised by October 2012
On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
5.12.4. Comprehensive and sequenced action plan on a recommendation of the mapping exercises on the intergovernmental transfers finalized by June 2013.
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed pending 5.12.3
Dec 2014 MYPR – Not reported
Achieved –Action plan appears to have resulted in LGDG Implementation and Operations Guide and Annual Assessment Framework
A measurable input milestone.
5.12.5. Reports to be produced annually by end September.
Sep 2012 JSM – Delayed and not achieved
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed pending 5.12.4
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain – No evidence of readiness to report provided.
A measurable output milestone.
5.13: Strengthened Public Financial Management
5.13.? Milestones developed and agreed after discussion with Zanzibar and thereafter decide on
Sep 2012 JSM – Delayed
Milestone replaced.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 130 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Reforms in Zanzibar by 2016
the support by Sep 2012 [Replaced by milestone 5.13.1]
5.13.? Zanzibar PFMRP strategy developed by Jun 2014 [Replaced by milestone 5.13.1]
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Milestone replaced.
A measurable input milestone.
5.13.1. Support to jointly (DPs, ZNZ and MoF) agreed Strategic plan on PFM reform in Zanzibar
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed.
Delayed - Strategic plan not yet agreed. Norway has expressed intent to join the DP basket to fund Zanzibar PFM.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 131 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub Programme
6.1: Strengthened capacity of local government authorities to collect revenue by 2015
Local Government own source revenue to GDP
Actual revenue collection by LGAs 2010/11: TZS 158,280 million and 0.46 % of GDP
Local Government own source revenue will be 1.5% of GDP
6.1.1 Completed assessment and evaluation of revenue potential for all major own sources of revenue to all LGAs by June 2014
Transferred from 1.3.1
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Achieved - Teams completed surveys of 20 LGAs Mar 2014.
A measurable input milestone.
6.1.2 Local Authorities tax administration teaching and practice modules established and TOT completed for all finance management staff at the regional level by June 2014.
Transferred from 1.3.2
Sep 2012 JSM – Needed revision
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed. This is being passed to external consultants.
A measurable input milestone.
6.1.3 PMO - RALG staff and Finance Management Officers at RS to be trained in tax revenue plans and budgets to spearhead LGAs tax reviews and reforms. June 2014
Transferred from 1.3.3
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Achieved . A measurable input milestone.
6.1.4 Four (4) Transferred from Delayed - This is A measurable input
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 132 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
Revenue Accountants, 3 council management team members and 1 FMO from each LGA and RS are trained on own source revenue management by June 2014.
1.3.4
Sep 2012 JSM – Needed revision
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
expected to be conducted during the period of this review.
milestone.
6.1.5 Establishment of known and clear revenue data base by each source of revenue, presence of trained personnel and a clear follow up arrangement at PMORALG and RS levels by June, 2015
Transferred from 1.3.5
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – On track
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed - The database software is known as iTax. The training took place between 15 Jun and 3 Jul 2015. The trained personnel have the software to install each database. These databases will still need to be populated.
A measurable input milestone.
Linked to 6.4.1
Local Government legislation reviewed by 2016 (Act No. 7, 8 and 9)
The last amendment of the Local Government Finances Act No.9 of 1982 was done in year 2002. The act
Local Government Finances Act No. 9 reviewed by 2014
6.1.6 Completed a study on the effectiveness, relevancy and sufficiency of the provisions of the Local Government Finances Act No. 9 by June
Transferred from 1.3.6
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Achieved but delayed - Internal study submitted to stakeholders week commencing 29 Jun 2015.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 133 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
does not adequately address issues of equity, change of technology and other administrative issues to enhance local revenue mobilization considering the present and future LGAs circumstances.
2014 Achieved
6.1.7 A bill for an act to amend the Local Government Finances Act No.9 of 1982 is finalized and submitted to the Cabinet by Nov 2014
Transferred from 1.3.7
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – At risk
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Delayed - Final drafting of bill in progress.
A measurable input milestone.
6.1.8 Improvement of financial management in LGAs by June 2015
Transferred from 1.3.8
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Sep 2013 JSM – New milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Achieved
Uncertain – The activities undertaken under this milestone and the extent of its achievement are unclear.
An unmeasurable output milestone.
6.2: Strengthened capacity of LGAs for MTEF preparation by
Comprehensiveness of information included in budget documentation
Currently there no sufficient information on LGAs revenue planning and budgeting which
Supportive and verifiable revenue data and information to be included in the LGAs
6.2.1 Proposal for budget information to be included in the Budget guideline to be submitted to National Budget Guideline
Transferred from 2.3.1
Sep 2012 JSM – To be reviewed
Sep 2013 JSM –
On-going achievement.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 134 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
2015 (PI-6) is included in the budget documentation.
budget documentation.
committee by October annually
Achieved
6.2.2. Recommendations of various studies on LGAs budget allocation formulas reviewed by [Dec 2012 which will include recommendations to be made by the fiscal decentralisation task force in LGRP II by] June 2014. [The M&E framework under LGRP II included performance indicator to measure application of formulae based allocations to actual fund transfers.]
Transferred from 2.3.2
Sep 2012 JSM – At risk
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Achieved - The final report was submitted in Feb 2015.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
6.2.? All LGAs update their strategic plans and align their budget with updated strategic plans for 2015/16 [New milestone introduced by Dec 2014 MYPR]
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain - The component manager was not aware that this was a required milestone.
A measurable input milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 135 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
6.2.3. Agreement on improvement of LGAs budget allocation formulas among the Sector Ministries (PMO-RALG, MOF, PO-PSM and Sectors) completed by Jun 2014 [Original target Jun 2013]
Transferred from 2.3.3
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Delayed
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed - Study completed and stakeholder meeting held in Feb 2015. Cabinet paper preparation and submission on hold.
A measurable input milestone.
Various studies in fiscal transfers and decentralization process in Tanzania indicate that budget allocation to LGAs reflects a more inequitable distribution of resources to LGA, and that the allocation formulae are not fully
Currently budget allocation formula follow, population, land area and poverty level,
Budget allocation formula reflects resource needs, distances from service facilities, special area diseases, number of projects to be implemented, number of orphans etc.
6.2.4 All LGAs budget allocation formulae reviewed by June, 2014
Transferred from 2.3.4
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending 6.2.3
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
Not achieved. Dependent on previous milestone.
A measurable input milestone.
6.2.5 All reviewed LGA budget allocation formulae applied in the budget preparation during 2014/15 for the FY15/16 budget.
Transferred from 2.3.5
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending 6.2.4
Dec 2014 MYPR –
Not achieved. Dependent on previous milestone.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 136 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
applied. There is a need to revisit all the existing budget allocation formulae to clearly reflect equitable allocation of financial resources by June 2016.
Pending 6.2.4
6.2.6 Monitoring arrangements in place for measuring deviations in actual releases against all formula based allocations to LGAs for FY 15/16.
Transferred from 2.3.6
Sep 2012 JSM – On track
Sep 2013 JSM – Pending 6.2.2
Dec 2014 MYPR – Pending 6.2.2
PMO-RALG believes this is still with the Budget Division but questions its appropriateness and is seeking a change of funding allocation in the next financial year.
A measurable output milestone.
6.3: LGA (and LLGs) receive 40% of development budget allocation within five months of financial year and 90% of development budget within 10 months of financial year by June 2017
6.3.1 Improve the fiscal transfer mechanism and monitoring of Fiscal Transfers from Central Government to LGAs
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
Delayed but in progress – A web portal has been developed effective from 15 Jul 2015.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
6.3.2 Monitoring of resource flows from LGAs to LLGs
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed but in progress. The same portal as for 6.3.1 used effective 15 Jul 2015.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
6.4: Own revenue
6.4.1 Tax payers database (i-Tax) rolled
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently
Delayed - The trained persons
An unmeasurable
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 137 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
mobilization by LGAs doubled in three years by June 2017
out across all LGAs developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
have the software to install the database. These databases will still need to be populated.
input milestone.
Linked to 6.1.5
6.5: PFM capacity in Regional Administration strengthened
6.5.1 Create a cadre of regional PFM champions
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
Achieved - This should be more appropriately called a team not a cadre. It was formed in Jul 2014.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
6.6: Budget execution by LGAs is improved by June 2017
Budget out-turn improved by 20%
Unvouched/improperly vouched expenditure reduced by 50%
No LGA has outstanding imprest end of the year
Procurement compliance
6.6.1 Improve financial management practices in LGAs including bank reconciliation, imprest retirement, compliance in procurement norms through financial benchmarking
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
In progress – Benchmarking template has been developed in Jun 2015 but benchmarking has yet to be undertaken.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
The wording is inappropriate. Improvement cannot be achieved through benchmarking alone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 138 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
improved by 20%
6.7: Improved financial reporting by LGAs by June 2017
Timely quarterly and annual financial reports
6.7.1 Improved utilization of financial reports from IFMIS by LGAs
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Delayed – Approval to tender for consultant given Jun 2015.
An unmeasurable output milestone.
At least 90% of LGAs submit appropriate financial statements for CAG audit
6.7.2 All LGAs submit appropriate annual financial report for CAG Audit
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed
Achieved - PMO RALG collected all LGAs 2013/14 financial statements and submitted them on 15 Oct 2014
A measurable output milestone.
6.8: 95% of LGAs get unqualified opinion from CAG by June 2017
6.8.1 Implementation of internal and external audit recommendations by LGAs improved
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
In progress - PMO RALG consolidated all LGAS responses in Apr 2015 and submitted a report to Parliament 14 May 2015
An unmeasurable input milestone.
6.9: 80% LGAs meet benchmarks set by IAGD
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 139 | P a g e
PFMRP Strategic Plan
Output
Output performance
indicators
Indicator Baseline 2011
Indicator Target 2017
Milestones Reported
achievement Extent achieved Comments
by June 2017
6.10: Fraud prevention and anticorruption measures undertaken
6.10.1 Fraud prevention plan implemented across all LGAs [by end of 2015/16]
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – Delayed with specified target date
Delayed – Plan yet to be developed. PCCB participate in meeting with LGAs and PMO RALG 6 Jul 2015.
A measurable output milestone.
6.11: Key fiscal information made available in public domain
6.11.1 Financial Transparency in LGAs improved
Sep 2012 JSM – Nil – Subsequently developed milestone
Dec 2014 MYPR – On track
Uncertain due to a lack of clarity as to what actually is targeted to be achieved.
An unmeasurable input milestone.
6.12: Local PEFA assessment undertaken
6.12.1 Local PEFA assessment undertaken
Dec 2014 MYPR – New milestone not reported on
Achieved – PEFA undertaken for 12 LGAs. Reports currently circulated for comments.
A measurable output milestone.
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 140 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Whole of PFMRP IV 173,435,676 33,518,000 46,398,322 37,056,265 41,835,184 24.12 17,258,339 18,916,905 5,659,940 -48.51 -59.23 -84.73
KRA 1 Revenue Management 8,291,000 1,823,000 1,651,837 1,926,350 1,980,050 23.88 766,335 954,088 259,627 -57.96 -42.24 -86.52
1.1 Improved quality of forecasting 1,224,000 216,000 268,597 - 112,200 9.17 59,500 52,700 - -72.45 -80.38
1.1.1 Study to identify and action plan - - - 0%
1.1.2 Team of trainers developed 1,224,000 216,000 268,597 112,200 9.17 59,500 52,700 -72.45 -80.38 100%
1.2 Improve domest. rev. mobilization 819,000 695,000 278,250 317,500 473,889 57.86 281,005 161,560 31,324 -95.31 -67.10 -90.13
1.2.1 Study NTR Collection Systems 452,000 452,000 204,614 45.27 204,614 -54.73 100%
1.2.2 Recommendations action plan - - - 100%
1.2.3 Action plan incorporated - - - 25%
1.2.4 Tax Admin. Bill submission 63,000 63,000 63,000 52,000 82.54 52,000 - -17.46 -100.00 100%
1.2.5 Review LG revenue system laws - - - - 50%
1.2.6 Nat. resource rev. mobilisation - - - 0%
1.2.7 Computerized rev. collection 127,000 127,000 162,250 125,000 192,884 151.88 - 161,560 31,324 -100.00 -0.43 -74.94 25%
1.2.8 Review tax exempt and VAT Act 177,000 53,000 53,000 192,500 24,391 13.78 24,391 - - -53.98 -100.00 -100.00 100%
1.3 Improve LG capacity to collect rev. 5,544,000 551,000 600,930 923,600 981,533 17.70 317,800 435,430 228,303 -67.72 -44.07 -75.28
1.3.1 Assess and eval. Rev. potential 253,000 150,000 102,800 252,800 99.92 150,000 102,800 0.00 0.00 100%
1.3.2 LGAs tax admin. Training 608,000 118,000 343,940 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
1.3.3 PMORALG & RS staff tax trained 100,000 100,000 100,000 100.00 100,000 0.00 100%
1.3.4 LGA & RS rev. manag. trained 2,686,000 110,000 - - -100.00 0%
1.3.5 Data base PMORALG & RS 1,757,000 - 498,130 382,560 382,426 21.77 - 332,630 49,796 -33.22 -86.98 80%
1.3.6 LG Finances Act Study 68,000 68,000 74,605 101,124 148.71 31,500 69,624 -53.68 -6.68 100%
1.3.7 LG Finances Bill submitted 72,000 5,000 6,500 36,300 50.42 36,300 - 626.00 -100.00 80%
1.3.8 LGA fin. management improved - 115,995 108,883 ∞ 108,883 -6.13 50%
1.4 DP funds thru exchequer system 704,000 361,000 504,060 685,250 412,428 58.58 108,030 304,398 - -70.07 -39.61 -100.00
1.4.1 Dev. Coop. framework operates 227,000 227,000 88,060 168,000 193,428 85.21 108,030 85,398 - -52.41 -3.02 -100.00 95%
1.4.2 Revised JAST and AMP commu. 194,000 115,000 342,000 212,688 145,000 74.74 - 145,000 - -100.00 -57.60 -100.00 100%
1.4.3 Project Fund Port. Disbursed exch. 283,000 19,000 74,000 304,562 74,000 26.15 - 74,000 - -100.00 0.00 -100.00 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 141 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 2 Budgeting and planning 9,627,000 2,167,000 2,014,400 1,427,570 537,647 5.58 187,829 349,818 - -91.33 -82.63 -100.00
2.1 Program based budgeting (PBB) 2,937,000 972,000 873,140 469,050 232,500 7.92 97,410 135,090 - -89.98 -84.53 -100.00
2.1.1 Define sub-progs and PIs 250,000 125,000 218,200 60,150 197,960 79.18 62,870 135,090 - -49.70 -38.09 -100.00 50%
2.1.2 Chart of accounts modified 506,000 190,000 175,000 16,170 3.20 16,170 - -91.49 -100.00 100%
2.1.3 Review MTEF - PBB compatible 1,283,000 255,000 278,900 408,900 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 -100.00 50%
2.1.4 Progress on PBB action plan - - 0%
2.1.5 Phased training MDAs and RSs 436,000 208,000 201,040 18,370 4.21 18,370 - -91.17 -100.00 0%
2.1.6 Phased training LGAs 462,000 194,000 - - -100.00 0%
2.2 Utilization of budgeting tools 6,101,000 1,038,000 1,097,260 657,770 170,728 2.80 - 170,728 - -100.00 -84.44 -100.00
2.2.1 MTSPBM reviewed 374,000 187,000 208,210 335,000 64,860 17.34 - 64,860 - -100.00 -68.85 -100.00 95%
2.2.2 All MTSPBM trained 1,227,000 220,000 542,250 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
2.2.3 MTSPBM to be applied - - - - 50%
2.2.4 Annexes to vol. II for EAs 687,000 127,000 128,000 46,700 58,000 8.44 - 58,000 - -100.00 -54.69 -100.00 0%
2.2.5 Action plan on legal framework - - 218,800 23,000 47,868 ∞ - 47,868 - -78.12 -100.00 100%
2.2.6 10 PER main dialogue meetings 1,900,000 195,000 - - -100.00 70%
2.2.7 Budget committees training 1,609,000 269,000 253,070 - - - -100.00 -100.00 50%
2.2.8 QA of qutr. budget reports 304,000 40,000 - - -100.00 0%
2.2.9 Reallocation warrants published - 100%
2.2.10 GoT approves actions - 0%
2.3 LGAs MTEF preparation capacity 379,000 157,000 44,000 300,750 134,419 35.47 90,419 44,000 - -42.41 0.00 -100.00
2.3.1 Guideline includes budget info 65,000 45,000 260,250 42,575 65.50 42,575 -5.39 -100.00 100%
2.3.2 LGA studies budget allocation 54,000 54,000 47,844 88.60 47,844 - -11.40 100%
2.3.3 Agree LGAs allocation formulae 58,000 58,000 40,500 - - - -100.00 -100.00 90%
2.3.4 All formulae reviewed 44,000 - 44,000 44,000 100.00 - 44,000 0.00 0%
2.3.5 Budget allocation formulae used 131,000 - - - 0%
2.3.6 Monitor actual vs formula-based 27,000 - - - 0%
2.4 Budget docs quality & public access 210,000 - - - - - - -
2.4.1 Public access fiscal information 122,000 - - - 100%
2.4.2. Plan for improving budget docs 72,000 - - - 0%
2.4.3 Changes in budget docs 16,000 - - - 0%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 142 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones
(cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 3 Budget Exec., Accountblity & Trnsp. 19,622,000 4,525,000 5,982,700 6,161,270 4,463,801 22.75 936,451 2,308,139 1,219,211 -79.30 -61.42 -80.21
3.1 Improved public sector procurement 2,788,000 545,000 876,000 1,697,500 1,024,706 36.75 354,174 407,333 263,199 -35.01 -53.50 -84.49
3.1.1 Action plan for PPA - - - - 0%
3.1.2 New procurement regulations 174,000 - - - 100%
3.1.3 Procurement TNA exercise 413,000 178,000 152,500 166,000 330,039 79.91 178,000 63,346 88,693 0.00 -58.46 -46.57 100%
3.1.4 [300] procurement staff trained - - - - 0%
3.1.5 PMU Strategy 73,000 73,000 82,000 64,525 88.39 64,525 - -11.61 -100.00 100%
3.1.6 Procurement staff database 258,000 26,000 141,500 114,000 215,682 83.60 3,176 141,500 71,006 -87.78 0.00 -37.71 60%
3.1.7 National procurement policy draft - - - - 95%
3.1.8 Stakeholders’ comments incorp. - - - - 100%
3.1.9 PPPDs’ capacity enhanced 665,000 100,000 191,500 111,202 16.72 89,702 21,500 -10.30 -88.77 75%
3.1.10 20 PPPD staff with skills - - 145,000 141,487 ∞ - 141,487 -2.42 70%
3.1.11 National procurement policy 446,000 64,000 256,000 18,771 4.21 18,771 - -70.67 -100.00 95%
3.1.12 Nat. proc. policy strategy 327,000 104,000 181,000 94,000 61,000 18.65 - 61,000 - -100.00 -66.30 -100.00 0%
3.1.13 Printing and NPP on the website - - - - 0%
3.1.14 NPP and law synchronised 114,000 - 208,000 - - - -100.00 0%
3.1.15 Monitoring NPP implementation - - 197,000 - - - -100.00 0%
3.1.16 NPP implement eval. & feedback - - - - 0%
3.1.17 1000 Stakeholders know NPP 318,000 - 400,000 - - - -100.00 0%
3.1.18 Strategy on Stakeholders awareness - 245,000 82,000 ∞ 82,000 -66.53 50%
3.2 Strengthened cash management 4,956,000 602,000 694,500 994,500 790,183 15.94 199,183 294,500 296,500 -66.91 -57.60 -70.19
3.2.1 600 cash management trained 4,956,000 602,000 694,500 994,500 790,183 15.94 199,183 294,500 296,500 -66.91 -57.60 -70.19 50%
3.2.2 6 bank ac/s for each LGA - - - - 100%
3.2.3. Monthly ACGEN arrears report - - - 100%
3.3 Public debt management capacity 2,060,000 1,317,000 - 302,300 - - - - -100.00 -100.00
3.3.1 Debt manage actions shared - - - - 100%
3.3.2 Debt management policy 316,000 263,000 - - -100.00 100%
3.3.3 50 Public debt management staff - - - - 0%
3.3.4 Review of GLG&G Act 254,000 230,000 - - -100.00 95%
3.3.5 Debt management department 1,490,000 824,000 106,800 - - - -100.00 -100.00 95%
3.3.6. Monitoring contingent liabilities - - 42,000 - - -100.00 0%
3.3.7. Monitoring of guarantees - - 153,500 - - -100.00 0%
3.3.8. Quarterly debt report - - - 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 143 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 3 Budget Exec., Accountblity & Trnsp. 19,622,000 4,525,000 5,982,700 6,161,270 4,463,801 22.75 936,451 2,308,139 1,219,211 -79.30 -61.42 -80.21
3.4 Improved government fin. statements 1,327,000 482,000 1,902,200 782,500 1,457,454 109.83 280,506 1,060,708 116,240 -41.80 -44.24 -85.15
3.4.1 Review of the IPSAS guideline - - - - 0%
3.4.2 Develop IPSAS accrual awareness 95,000 95,000 39,920 42.02 39,920 -57.98 100%
3.4.3 Capacity building 250 staff - - 152,973 ∞ 152,973 100%
3.4.4 Review PF legislation for accrual 242,000 30,000 84,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 25%
3.4.5 Consolidated template of fin. stats. 138,000 29,000 800,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 100%
3.4.6 250 trained IPSAS&Epicor accrual 360,000 153,000 - - -100.00 0%
3.4.7 Plan for migration to accrual 215,000 50,000 808,700 698,500 891,426 414.62 7,813 767,373 116,240 -84.37 -5.11 -83.36 100%
3.4.8. Plan approved & shared 120,000 71,000 65,800 54.83 65,800 -7.32 0%
3.4.9 Legal & policy supports decisions 157,000 54,000 14,000 8.92 14,000 -74.07 0%
3.4.10 Milestones identified & approved - - - - 0%
3.4.11 Consolidated accrual based ac/s - 293,500 293,335 ∞ - 293,335 -0.06 60%
3.4.12 Fin. stats. on econ. class & sector - - 0%
3.5 Improved accounting of gov. assets 8,491,000 1,579,000 2,510,000 2,384,470 1,191,458 14.03 102,588 545,598 543,272 -93.50 -78.26 -77.22
3.5.1 70 additional MDAs in EPICOR 89,000 89,000 184,000 75,570 58,292 65.50 58,292 - - -34.50 -100.00 -100.00 60%
3.5.2 Asset manage. software in use 1,412,000 122,000 579,000 111,000 1,946 0.14 - 1,946 - -100.00 -99.66 -100.00 100%
3.5.3 GAM capacity enhanced 484,000 130,000 220,000 241,500 164,296 33.95 44,296 120,000 - -65.93 -45.45 -100.00 100%
3.5.4. Asset manage. policy submitted 451,000 227,000 138,000 315,400 82,981 18.40 - 82,981 - -100.00 -39.87 -100.00 95%
3.5.5. Valuation 34 MDAs and RSs 6,055,000 1,011,000 1,389,000 1,641,000 883,943 14.60 - 340,671 543,272 -100.00 -75.47 -66.89 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 144 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight 70,002,717 15,607,000 26,323,883 11,159,816 23,801,549 34.00 11,273,984 9,495,429 3,032,136 -27.76 -63.93 -72.83
4.1 Increased internal audit function 5,986,000 1,624,000 2,339,000 2,947,616 2,961,262 49.47 373,957 1,420,905 1,166,400 -76.97 -39.25 -60.43
4.1.1 Operational plan approved - - - - 100%
4.1.2. IA improvement prog. in place 1,447,000 414,000 174,427 12.05 174,427 -57.87 100%
4.1.3 450 IAs trained on procedures 389,872 233,072 ∞ - 233,072 -40.22 25%
4.1.4 IAUs in MDAs&LGAs assessment 1,723,000 269,000 342,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
4.1.5 IAUs and committees established 1,028,000 728,564 1,066,214 ∞ 51,300 773,000 241,914 -24.81 -66.80 25%
4.1.6. Pilot stage of computerised audit 1,018,000 319,000 135,500 85,327 8.38 33,000 52,327 -89.66 -61.38 50%
4.1.7. Computerised audit in place - - 650,000 - - - -100.00 0%
4.1.8. 70 Proect tech. audits conducted 535,000 197,000 228,000 477,150 482,662 90.22 15,537 228,000 239,125 -92.11 0.00 -49.88 70%
4.1.9 IA/CAG corrective measures status - - 25%
4.1.10 550 trained in risk based audit 1,263,000 425,000 433,000 451,650 919,560 72.81 99,693 419,905 399,962 -76.54 -3.02 -11.44 100%
4.1.11 300 trained re fraud risk 275,200 - - - -100.00 30%
4.1.12 Study to assess the ICT needs 147,680 - - - -100.00 0%
4.2 Strengthened external audit function 50,641,000 8,998,000 16,476,470 1,677,446 12,564,274 24.81 7,185,333 4,626,375 752,566 -20.15 -71.92 -55.14
4.2.1 Report on legal changes submitted 497,000 150,000 39,000 189,000 38.03 150,000 39,000 0.00 0.00 100%
4.2.1a Enhance CAG independence 143,800 96,000 0%
4.2.2. 100% moved to NAO offices 44,713,000 7,500,000 15,250,000 10,900 10,038,575 22.45 5,700,000 4,334,375 4,200 -24.00 -71.58 -61.47 85%
4.2.3 Train 300 risk based & 200 IT audit 900,000 300,000 289,570 306,190 34.02 306,190 - 2.06 -100.00 70%
4.2.4 2 VFM audit reports each year 161,000 61,000 76,889 29,939 18.60 29,939 - -50.92 -100.00 100%
4.2.5. Train 300 international standards 431,000 293,000 384,150 293,339 68.06 293,339 - 0.12 -100.00 50%
4.2.6 Parastatals audit modalities agreed 135,000 50,000 177,850 94,000 69.63 50,000 44,000 0.00 -75.26 50%
4.2.7 Audit in line with ISSAIs guidelines 357,000 317,000 322,675 90.39 322,675 1.79 100%
4.2.8 Study re o/s matters database 150,000 150,000 104,500 254,500 169.67 150,000 104,500 0.00 0.00 100%
4.2.9 Establish a database 250,000 - 186,027 90,360 36.14 - 90,360 -51.43 100%
4.2.10 300 trained on ACL 850,000 - 260,750 188,000 188,000 22.12 - - 188,000 -100.00 0.00 70%
4.2.11 NAO HQ connected to 10 ROs 1,977,000 177,000 250,500 230,296 11.65 183,190 47,106 3.50 -81.20 100%
4.2.12 2 of 5 Team Mate modules applied 220,000 - 148,500 643,480 431,400 196.09 - 148,500 282,900 0.00 -56.04 60%
4.3 Better transparency on audit reports 668,000 198,000 220,835 161,410 494,725 74.06 204,190 220,835 69,700 3.13 0.00 -56.82
4.3.1 Citizen audit reports available 668,000 198,000 220,835 161,410 494,725 74.06 204,190 220,835 69,700 3.13 0.00 -56.82 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 145 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight 70,002,717 15,607,000 26,323,883 11,159,816 23,801,549 34.00 11,273,984 9,495,429 3,032,136 -27.76 -63.93 -72.83
4.4: Improved performance of parastatals 2,415,000 910,000 1,628,800 1,943,000 1,868,433 77.37 - 1,328,798 539,635 -100.00 -18.42 -72.23
4.4.1 10 sign performance contracts 575,000 - 120,000 257,500 338,384 58.85 - 107,584 230,800 -10.35 -10.37 100%
4.4.2 Database on Parastatals set up - - - - 60%
4.4.3 M&E for compliance rate set up - - 51,000 524,380 54,329 ∞ - 47,782 6,547 -6.31 -98.75 0%
4.4.4 New TR's Bill presented 230,000 230,000 300,500 387,000 267,579 116.34 - 267,579 - -100.00 -10.96 -100.00 95%
4.4.5 150 Parastatals’ acts reviewed 361,000 237,000 274,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
4.4.6 TR’s Office capacities enhanced 1,249,000 443,000 883,300 774,120 1,208,141 96.73 - 905,853 302,288 -100.00 2.55 -60.95 90%
4.5: Strengthened capacity of PAC 6,323,000 428,000 974,695 683,720 1,513,248 23.93 434,373 830,875 248,000 1.49 -14.76 -63.73
4.5.1 Annual capacity building interventions 6,323,000 428,000 974,695 683,720 1,513,248 23.93 434,373 830,875 248,000 1.49 -14.76 -63.73 50%
4.6 Better PE procurement performances 3,969,717 3,449,000 4,684,083 3,246,625 4,285,275 107.95 3,076,131 1,067,641 141,503 -10.81 -77.21 -95.64
4.6.1 Annual PPRA audit results confirm 66,000 66,000 779,750 1,022,900 428,911 649.87 66,200 362,711 - 0.30 -53.48 -100.00 100%
4.6.2 Implementation and monitoring tools 88,000 88,000 26,000 92,252 104.83 88,100 4,152 0.11 -84.03 100%
4.6.3 New PPA regulations and tools 1,717 1,060,000 129,992 192,300 209,838 12221.20 78,800 60,727 70,311 -92.57 -53.28 -63.44 100%
4.6.4 Procure. & strategic plans aligned - - - - 25%
4.6.5 VFM thru framework contracts 566,000 256,000 400,000 261,752 46.25 55,900 205,852 -78.16 -48.54 50%
4.6.6 PPRA operational with outreach 2,112,000 843,000 2,640,492 1,461,125 2,101,385 99.50 1,819,091 216,254 66,040 115.79 -91.81 -95.48 80%
4.6.7 All PEs have functional PMIS 1,136,000 1,136,000 594,835 82,500 248,784 21.90 33,290 214,494 1,000 -97.07 -63.94 -98.79 90%
4.6.8 e-procurement at pilot stage - - 438,600 - - - -100.00 0%
4.6.9 Annual audits one-third of all PEs - - 23,200 934,750 ∞ 934,750 - -100.00 10%
4.6.10 Annual follow up audit 100 PEs - - - - 75%
4.6.11 Annual Proc. Perf. Eval. Report - - 139,014 7,603 ∞ - 7,603 -94.53 100%
4.7. HCMIS in service delivery points - - - 499,999 114,332 ∞ - - 114,332 -77.13
4.7.1 User requirements for 160 SDPs 114,332 114,332 ∞ 114,332 0.00 0%
4.7.2 HCMIS at 160 SDPs 385,667 - - -100.00 0%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 146 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.) Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management63,128,000 9,396,000 9,906,502 14,135,300 10,315,738 16.34 4,093,740 5,587,307 634,691 -56.43 -43.60 -95.51
5.1 Coordinate integration of fin. systems 3,839,000 823,000 2,378,270 3,265,900 1,687,228 43.95 474,273 1,082,739 130,216 -42.37 -54.47 -96.01
5.1.1 ICT mapping exercise 312,000 312,000 130,698 41.89 130,698 -58.11 100%
5.1.2 Stakeholder coordination meetings 168,000 168,000 230,000 54,788 32.61 3,959 50,829 -97.64 -77.90 100%
5.1.3 Prioritized and costed action plan 1,104,000 5,000 912,000 248,475 22.51 2,835 245,640 -43.30 -73.07 100%
5.1.4. Integration plan implemented 1,104,000 - 450,000 1,230,000 106,554 9.65 - - 106,554 -100.00 -91.34 0%
5.1.5 IFMS in 35 LGAs, RSs and PMORALG 254,000 254,000 1,885,100 277,622 109.30 253,960 23,662 -0.02 -98.74 0%
5.1.6. EPICOR linked PMO-RALG IFMS - - 150,800 - - - -100.00 100%
5.1.7 Capacity building to new key users 84,000 84,000 459,920 542,741 646.12 82,821 459,920 -1.40 0.00 0%
5.1.8. Audit of IFMIS in LGAs conducted 813,000 - 326,350 326,350 40.14 - 326,350 0.00 0%
5.2 EPICOR modules use increased 34,957,000 4,239,000 1,639,847 5,423,000 3,015,518 8.63 1,581,922 1,385,096 48,500 -62.68 -15.54 -99.11
5.2.1 EPICOR system upgrade 442,000 442,000 937,500 593,000 1,216,154 275.15 350,000 866,154 - -20.81 -7.61 -100.00 100%
5.2.2 ACGEN staff capacity enhanced 34,160,000 3,703,000 330,000 160,500 0.47 112,000 48,500 -96.98 -85.30 100%
Office accomodation contructed all zones 4,500,000 1,023,116 1,023,116 -
5.2.3 Training on upgraded modules 355,000 94,000 702,347 615,748 173.45 96,806 518,942 2.99 -26.11 50%
5.3 Software & module upgrades coordinated1,348,000 358,000 902,000 870,000 905,286 67.16 183,027 561,887 160,372 -48.88 -37.71 -81.57
5.3.1 FISM is operationalized 81,000 81,000 482,000 630,000 280,417 346.19 48,417 232,000 - -40.23 -51.87 -100.00 0%
5.3.2 FISM staff capacity enhanced 1,267,000 277,000 420,000 240,000 624,869 49.32 134,610 329,887 160,372 -51.40 -21.46 -33.18 0%
5.4 Public access to fiscal information 317,000 266,000 623,500 494,900 538,925 170.01 154,500 321,951 62,474 -41.92 -48.36 -87.38
5.4.1 Support Budget Division & PAD - 350,400 161,100 102,051 ∞ - 102,051 - -70.88 -100.00 50%
5.4.2 MoF Communication Strategy 317,000 266,000 200,100 70,000 375,874 118.57 154,500 190,900 30,474 -41.92 -4.60 -56.47 95%
5.4.3 Action plan for MoF website - 73,000 263,800 61,000 ∞ - 29,000 32,000 -60.27 -87.87 100%
5.5 Coordinate & Standardise PFM Training 516,000 281,000 407,000 320,000 222,100 43.04 72,100 150,000 - -74.34 -63.14 -100.00
5.5.1 Training mapping exercise 112,000 112,000 72,100 64.38 72,100 -35.63 100%
5.5.2 Capacity building plan 169,000 169,000 168,500 150,000 88.76 - 150,000 -100.00 -10.98 50%
5.5.3. Impact assessment PFM training 235,000 - 238,500 320,000 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
5.6 Comp'nt managers multi-year op. plans 266,000 81,000 95,500 98,500 156,500 58.83 61,000 95,500 - -24.69 0.00 -100.00
5.6.1. Annual activities in multi-year plan 266,000 81,000 95,500 98,500 156,500 58.83 61,000 95,500 - -24.69 0.00 -100.00 100%
5.7 Activities planned and implemented 2,490,000 690,000 855,086 614,000 803,273 32.26 431,573 371,700 - -37.45 -56.53 -100.00
5.7.1 Chnge mang. / strat. plan. training 2,288,000 488,000 371,700 334,000 602,072 26.31 230,372 371,700 - -52.79 0.00 -100.00 100%
5.7.2 Results based manag. training 202,000 202,000 483,386 280,000 201,201 99.60 201,201 - - -0.40 -100.00 -100.00 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 147 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management63,128,000 9,396,000 9,906,502 14,135,300 10,315,738 16.34 4,093,740 5,587,307 634,691 -56.43 -43.60 -95.51
5.8 Coordination of activities and support 4,470,000 1,192,000 1,216,200 650,000 1,412,447 31.60 657,612 551,448 203,387 -44.83 -54.66 -68.71
5.8.1 Secretariat procurement process 852,000 374,000 102,832 12.07 102,832 -72.50 100%
5.8.2 Secretariat work plan annually 18,000 18,000 - - -100.00 100%
5.8.3 Coord. secretariat facilitated annually 3,600,000 800,000 800,000 650,000 912,225 25.34 277,390 431,448 203,387 -65.33 -46.07 -68.71 50%
5.8.3 Coord. secretariat facilitated annually 416,200 397,390 ∞ 277,390 120,000 -71.17
5.9 Program with clearly defined milestones 75,000 75,000 130,000 130,000 139,902 186.54 - 130,000 9,902 -100.00 0.00 -92.38
5.9.1. Annual revision of M&E framework 75,000 75,000 130,000 130,000 139,902 186.54 - 130,000 9,902 -100.00 0.00 -92.38 100%
5.10 Reforms coordinated with stakeholders 596,000 199,000 505,143 579,400 163,696 27.47 59,073 86,623 18,000 -70.32 -82.85 -96.89
5.10.1 PFM information session 130,000 130,000 - - -100.00 0%
5.10.2 1 annual PFM reform info. day 466,000 69,000 505,143 579,400 163,696 35.13 59,073 86,623 18,000 -14.39 -82.85 -96.89 0%
5.11: PFMRP result based management 4,000,000 438,000 558,600 664,600 772,275 19.31 299,335 471,100 1,840 -31.66 -15.66 -99.72
5.11.1 Annual work plan & milestones met 811,000 111,000 277,500 219,000 286,000 35.27 96,000 190,000 - -13.51 -31.53 -100.00 0%
5.11.2 Annual supervision mission 2,258,000 169,000 91,000 41,000 166,840 7.39 74,000 91,000 1,840 -56.21 0.00 -95.51 60%
5.11.3 Independent prog. evaluations 225,000 50,000 ∞ 50,000 - -100.00 100%
5.11.4 Dialogue structures working 931,000 158,000 190,100 179,600 269,435 28.94 79,335 190,100 - -49.79 0.00 -100.00 30%
5.12 Intergovernmental transfers rationalized 254,000 254,000 95,356 25,000 164,456 64.75 111,000 53,456 - -56.30 -43.94 -100.00
5.12.1 TORs completed 30,000 30,000 30,000 100.00 30,000 0.00 100%
5.12.2 Mapping commences - - - - 100%
5.12.3 Review initiated inception report 224,000 224,000 81,000 36.16 81,000 -63.84 100%
5.12.4 Comprehensive action plan - - 53,456 53,456 ∞ - 53,456 0.00 100%
5.12.5. Reports produced annually - - 41,900 25,000 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
5.13 Improved PFM Reforms in Zanzibar 10,000,000 500,000 500,000 1,000,000 334,132 3.34 8,325 325,807 - -98.34 -34.84 -100.00
5.13.1. DPs, ZNZ and MoF strategic plan 10,000,000 500,000 500,000 1,000,000 334,132 3.34 8,325 325,807 - -98.34 -34.84 -100.00 0%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 148 | P a g e
Appendix 7 – Budget compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub Program 2,764,959 - 519,000 2,245,959 736,399 26.63 - 222,124 514,275 -57.20 -77.10
6.3 LGA receive 40% and 90% of devt budget 357,956 - - 357,956 82,982 23.18 - - 82,982 -76.82
6.3.1 Improve fiscal transfer mechanism 8,760 8,760 - - -100.00 50%
Update strategic plans & aligned budgets 168,858 168,858 53,227 31.52 53,227 -68.48
6.3.2 Monitor resource flows LGAs to LLGs 180,338 180,338 29,755 16.50 29,755 -83.50 50%
6.4 Own Revenue Mobilizatin Doubled 176,567 - - 176,567 - - - - -100.00
6.4.1 Tax payers database (I-Tax) 176,567 176,567 - - -100.00 50%
6.5 PFM Capacity in RA strengthened 145,200 - - 145,200 78,300 53.93 - - 78,300 -46.07
6.5.1 Regional PFM Champs created 145,200 145,200 78,300 53.93 78,300 -46.07 100%
6.6 Budget Execution Improved by LGAs 844,376 - 519,000 325,376 316,816 37.52 - 222,124 94,692 -57.20 -70.90
6.6.1. Financial management improved 619,176 293,800 325,376 94,692 15.29 - 94,692 -100.00 -70.90 25%
6.6.1. Financial management improved 225,200 225,200 222,124 98.63 222,124 -1.37
6.7 Improved Financial Reporting by LGAs 420,849 - - 420,849 98,514 23.41 - - 98,514 -76.59
6.7.1 Utilization of IFMIS finan. Rep. improv 187,200 187,200 - - -100.00 0%
6.7.1 Utilization of IFMIS finan. Rep. improv 130,197 130,197 71,017 54.55 71,017 -45.45
6.7.2 Sumit annual finan. rep. to CAG Audit 103,452 103,452 27,497 26.58 27,497 -73.42 100%
6.8 95% LGA get unqualified opinion from CAG318,773 - - 318,773 97,079 30.45 - - 97,079 -69.55
6.8.1 Imple. Of inter and exter. Audit recomm 318,773 318,773 97,079 30.45 97,079 -69.55 95%
6.9 80% of LGAs meet IAGD st benchmarks - - - - - - - -
6.9.1. - -
6.10 Undertake fraud prevent. and anticorrup. measures146,573 - - 146,573 34,975 23.86 - - 34,975 -76.14
6.10.1 Fraud prevention plan implemented 146,573 146,573 34,975 23.86 34,975 -76.14 0%
6.11 Key Fiscal Information made public 156,505 - - 156,505 27,733 17.72 - - 27,733 -82.28
6.11.1 Financial Transparency improved 156,505 156,505 27,733 17.72 27,733 -82.28 0%
6.12 Local PEFA assessment undertaken 198,160 - - 198,160 - - - - -100.00
6.12.1 Local PEFA assessment done - - 95%
Submission of quartely IA Report 98,160 98,160 - - -100.00
LGA sensitized on new PPA 2013 100,000 100,000 - - -100.00
Budgets (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 149 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Whole of PFMRP IV 173,435,676 33,518,000 46,398,322 37,056,265 65,474,140 37.75 23,427,995 29,128,053 14,518,292 -30.10 -37.22 -60.82
KRA 1 Revenue Management 8,291,000 1,823,000 1,651,837 1,926,350 3,221,767 38.86 1,020,830 1,423,940 776,997 -44.00 -13.80 -59.66
1.1 Improved quality of forecasting 1,224,000 216,000 268,597 - 277,700 22.69 112,000 165,700 - -48.15 -38.31
1.1.1 Study to identify and action plan - - - 0%
1.1.2 Team of trainers developed 1,224,000 216,000 268,597 277,700 22.69 112,000 165,700 -48.15 -38.31 100%
1.2 Improve domest. rev. mobilization 819,000 695,000 278,250 317,500 803,750 98.14 368,000 278,250 157,500 -47.05 0.00 -50.39
1.2.1 Study NTR Collection Systems 452,000 452,000 252,000 55.75 252,000 -44.25 100%
1.2.2 Recommendations action plan - - - 100%
1.2.3 Action plan incorporated - - - 25%
1.2.4 Tax Admin. Bill submission 63,000 63,000 63,000 126,000 200.00 63,000 63,000 0.00 0.00 100%
1.2.5 Review LG revenue system laws - - - - 50%
1.2.6 Nat. resource rev. mobilisation - - - 0%
1.2.7 Computerized rev. collection 127,000 127,000 162,250 125,000 217,250 171.06 - 162,250 55,000 -100.00 0.00 -56.00 25%
1.2.8 Review tax exempt and VAT Act 177,000 53,000 53,000 192,500 208,500 117.80 53,000 53,000 102,500 0.00 0.00 -46.75 100%
1.3 Improve LG capacity to collect rev. 5,544,000 551,000 600,930 923,600 1,303,013 23.50 317,800 600,930 384,283 -42.32 0.00 -58.39
1.3.1 Assess and eval. Rev. potential 253,000 150,000 102,800 252,800 99.92 150,000 102,800 0.00 0.00 100%
1.3.2 LGAs tax admin. Training 608,000 118,000 343,940 27,703 4.56 - 27,703 -100.00 -91.95 0%
1.3.3 PMORALG & RS staff tax trained 100,000 100,000 100,000 100.00 100,000 0.00 100%
1.3.4 LGA & RS rev. manag. trained 2,686,000 110,000 - - -100.00 0%
1.3.5 Data base PMORALG & RS 1,757,000 - 498,130 382,560 657,610 37.43 - 498,130 159,480 0.00 -58.31 80%
1.3.6 LG Finances Act Study 68,000 68,000 74,605 106,105 156.04 31,500 74,605 -53.68 0.00 100%
1.3.7 LG Finances Bill submitted 72,000 5,000 6,500 42,800 59.44 36,300 6,500 626.00 0.00 80%
1.3.8 LGA fin. management improved - 115,995 115,995 ∞ 115,995 0.00 50%
1.4 DP funds thru exchequer system 704,000 361,000 504,060 685,250 837,304 118.94 223,030 379,060 235,214 -38.22 -24.80 -65.67
1.4.1 Dev. Coop. framework operates 227,000 227,000 88,060 168,000 296,890 130.79 108,030 88,060 100,800 -52.41 0.00 -40.00 95%
1.4.2 Revised JAST and AMP commu. 194,000 115,000 342,000 212,688 419,088 216.02 115,000 217,000 87,088 0.00 -36.55 -59.05 100%
1.4.3 Project Fund Port. Disbursed exch. 283,000 19,000 74,000 304,562 121,326 42.87 - 74,000 47,326 -100.00 0.00 -84.46 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 150 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 2 Budgeting and planning 9,627,000 2,167,000 2,014,400 1,427,570 2,278,159 23.66 909,219 1,063,790 305,150 -58.04 -47.19 -78.62
2.1 Program based budgeting (PBB) 2,937,000 972,000 873,140 469,050 1,021,850 34.79 305,800 457,600 258,450 -68.54 -47.59 -44.90
2.1.1 Define sub-progs and PIs 250,000 125,000 218,200 60,150 388,350 155.34 125,000 218,200 45,150 0.00 0.00 -24.94 50%
2.1.2 Chart of accounts modified 506,000 190,000 175,000 147,000 29.05 74,000 73,000 -61.05 -58.29 100%
2.1.3 Review MTEF - PBB compatible 1,283,000 255,000 278,900 408,900 368,500 28.72 28,800 126,400 213,300 -88.71 -54.68 -47.84 50%
2.1.4 Progress on PBB action plan - - 0%
2.1.5 Phased training MDAs and RSs 436,000 208,000 201,040 79,000 18.12 39,000 40,000 -81.25 -80.10 0%
2.1.6 Phased training LGAs 462,000 194,000 39,000 8.44 39,000 -79.90 0%
2.2 Utilization of budgeting tools 6,101,000 1,038,000 1,097,260 657,770 911,890 14.95 303,000 562,190 46,700 -70.81 -48.76 -92.90
2.2.1 MTSPBM reviewed 374,000 187,000 208,210 335,000 252,190 67.43 57,000 195,190 - -69.52 -6.25 -100.00 95%
2.2.2 All MTSPBM trained 1,227,000 220,000 542,250 140,000 11.41 - 140,000 -100.00 -74.18 0%
2.2.3 MTSPBM to be applied - - - - 50%
2.2.4 Annexes to vol. II for EAs 687,000 127,000 128,000 46,700 167,700 24.41 61,000 60,000 46,700 -51.97 -53.13 0.00 0%
2.2.5 Action plan on legal framework - - 218,800 23,000 167,000 ∞ - 167,000 - -23.67 -100.00 100%
2.2.6 10 PER main dialogue meetings 1,900,000 195,000 125,000 6.58 125,000 -35.90 70%
2.2.7 Budget committees training 1,609,000 269,000 253,070 20,000 1.24 20,000 - -92.57 -100.00 50%
2.2.8 QA of qutr. budget reports 304,000 40,000 40,000 13.16 40,000 0.00 0%
2.2.9 Reallocation warrants published - 100%
2.2.10 GoT approves actions - 0%
2.3 LGAs MTEF preparation capacity 379,000 157,000 44,000 300,750 134,419 35.47 90,419 44,000 - -42.41 0.00 -100.00
2.3.1 Guideline includes budget info 65,000 45,000 260,250 42,575 65.50 42,575 -5.39 -100.00 100%
2.3.2 LGA studies budget allocation 54,000 54,000 47,844 88.60 47,844 - -11.40 100%
2.3.3 Agree LGAs allocation formulae 58,000 58,000 40,500 - - - -100.00 -100.00 90%
2.3.4 All formulae reviewed 44,000 - 44,000 44,000 100.00 - 44,000 0.00 0%
2.3.5 Budget allocation formulae used 131,000 - - - 0%
2.3.6 Monitor actual vs formula-based 27,000 - - - 0%
2.4 Budget docs quality & public access 210,000 - - - 210,000 100.00 210,000 - -
2.4.1 Public access fiscal information 122,000 - 122,000 100.00 122,000 100%
2.4.2. Plan for improving budget docs 72,000 - 72,000 100.00 72,000 0%
2.4.3 Changes in budget docs 16,000 - 16,000 100.00 16,000 0%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 151 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 3 Budget Exec., Accountblity & Trnsp. 19,622,000 4,525,000 5,982,700 6,161,270 9,817,503 50.03 2,677,810 4,332,700 2,806,993 -40.82 -27.58 -54.44
3.1 Improved public sector procurement 2,788,000 545,000 876,000 1,697,500 2,099,040 75.29 544,500 806,000 748,540 -0.09 -7.99 -55.90
3.1.1 Action plan for PPA - - - - 0%
3.1.2 New procurement regulations 174,000 - - - 100%
3.1.3 Procurement TNA exercise 413,000 178,000 152,500 166,000 418,387 101.30 178,000 85,000 155,387 0.00 -44.26 -6.39 100%
3.1.4 [300] procurement staff trained - - - - 0%
3.1.5 PMU Strategy 73,000 73,000 82,000 73,000 100.00 73,000 - 0.00 -100.00 100%
3.1.6 Procurement staff database 258,000 26,000 141,500 114,000 276,312 107.10 25,500 141,500 109,312 -1.92 0.00 -4.11 60%
3.1.7 National procurement policy draft - - - - 95%
3.1.8 Stakeholders’ comments incorp. - - - - 100%
3.1.9 PPPDs’ capacity enhanced 665,000 100,000 191,500 289,500 43.53 100,000 189,500 0.00 -1.04 75%
3.1.10 20 PPPD staff with skills - - 145,000 145,000 ∞ - 145,000 0.00 70%
3.1.11 National procurement policy 446,000 64,000 256,000 317,500 71.19 64,000 253,500 0.00 -0.98 95%
3.1.12 Nat. proc. policy strategy 327,000 104,000 181,000 94,000 330,000 100.92 104,000 181,000 45,000 0.00 0.00 -52.13 0%
3.1.13 Printing and NPP on the website - - - - 0%
3.1.14 NPP and law synchronised 114,000 - 208,000 - - - -100.00 0%
3.1.15 Monitoring NPP implementation - - 197,000 - - - -100.00 0%
3.1.16 NPP implement eval. & feedback - - - - 0%
3.1.17 1000 Stakeholders know NPP 318,000 - 400,000 87,841 27.62 - 87,841 -78.04 0%
3.1.18 Strategy on Stakeholders awareness - - 245,000 161,500 ∞ 161,500 -34.08 50%
3.2 Strengthened cash management 4,956,000 602,000 694,500 994,500 829,000 16.73 233,000 294,500 301,500 -61.30 -57.60 -69.68
3.2.1 600 cash management trained 4,956,000 602,000 694,500 994,500 829,000 16.73 233,000 294,500 301,500 -61.30 -57.60 -69.68 50%
3.2.2 6 bank ac/s for each LGA - - - - 100%
3.2.3. Monthly ACGEN arrears report - - - 100%
3.3 Public debt management capacity 2,060,000 1,317,000 - 302,300 192,300 9.33 - - 192,300 -100.00 -36.39
3.3.1 Debt manage actions shared - - - - 100%
3.3.2 Debt management policy 316,000 263,000 - - -100.00 100%
3.3.3 50 Public debt management staff - - - - 0%
3.3.4 Review of GLG&G Act 254,000 230,000 - - -100.00 95%
3.3.5 Debt management department 1,490,000 824,000 106,800 81,800 5.49 - 81,800 -100.00 -23.41 95%
3.3.6. Monitoring contingent liabilities - - 42,000 - - -100.00 0%
3.3.7. Monitoring of guarantees - - 153,500 110,500 ∞ 110,500 -28.01 0%
3.3.8. Quarterly debt report - - - 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 152 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 3 Budget Exec., Accountblity & Trnsp. 19,622,000 4,525,000 5,982,700 6,161,270 9,817,503 50.03 2,677,810 4,332,700 2,806,993 -40.82 -27.58 -54.44
3.4 Improved government fin. statements 1,327,000 482,000 1,902,200 782,500 1,749,966 131.87 471,738 1,102,200 176,028 -2.13 -42.06 -77.50
3.4.1 Review of the IPSAS guideline - - - - 0%
3.4.2 Develop IPSAS accrual awareness 95,000 95,000 103,205 108.64 103,205 8.64 100%
3.4.3 Capacity building 250 staff - - 153,000 ∞ 153,000 100%
3.4.4 Review PF legislation for accrual 242,000 30,000 84,000 30,000 12.40 30,000 - 0.00 -100.00 25%
3.4.5 Consolidated template of fin. stats. 138,000 29,000 800,000 29,000 21.01 29,000 - 0.00 -100.00 100%
3.4.6 250 trained IPSAS&Epicor accrual 360,000 153,000 - - -100.00 0%
3.4.7 Plan for migration to accrual 215,000 50,000 808,700 698,500 1,016,361 472.73 31,633 808,700 176,028 -36.73 0.00 -74.80 100%
3.4.8. Plan approved & shared 120,000 71,000 70,900 59.08 70,900 -0.14 0%
3.4.9 Legal & policy supports decisions 157,000 54,000 54,000 34.39 54,000 0.00 0%
3.4.10 Milestones identified & approved - - - - 0%
3.4.11 Consolidated accrual based ac/s - 293,500 293,500 ∞ - 293,500 0.00 60%
3.4.12 Fin. stats. on econ. class & sector - - 0%
3.5 Improved accounting of gov. assets 8,491,000 1,579,000 2,510,000 2,384,470 4,947,197 58.26 1,428,572 2,130,000 1,388,625 -9.53 -15.14 -41.76
3.5.1 70 additional MDAs in EPICOR 89,000 89,000 184,000 75,570 236,000 265.17 66,000 170,000 - -25.84 -7.61 -100.00 60%
3.5.2 Asset manage. software in use 1,412,000 122,000 579,000 111,000 552,000 39.09 122,000 430,000 - 0.00 -25.73 -100.00 100%
3.5.3 GAM capacity enhanced 484,000 130,000 220,000 241,500 431,530 89.16 130,000 120,000 181,530 0.00 -45.45 -24.83 100%
3.5.4. Asset manage. policy submitted 451,000 227,000 138,000 315,400 295,700 65.57 165,700 130,000 - -27.00 -5.80 -100.00 95%
3.5.5. Valuation 34 MDAs and RSs 6,055,000 1,011,000 1,389,000 1,641,000 3,431,967 56.68 944,872 1,280,000 1,207,095 -6.54 -7.85 -26.44 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 153 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight 70,002,717 15,607,000 26,323,883 11,159,816 32,418,879 46.31 12,833,807 14,010,758 5,574,314 -17.77 -46.78 -50.05
4.1 Increased internal audit function 5,986,000 1,624,000 2,339,000 2,947,616 4,584,829 76.59 1,323,050 1,694,000 1,567,779 -18.53 -27.58 -46.81
4.1.1 Operational plan approved - - - - 100%
4.1.2. IA improvement prog. in place 1,447,000 414,000 369,000 25.50 369,000 -10.87 100%
4.1.3 450 IAs trained on procedures 389,872 233,072 ∞ - 233,072 -40.22 25%
4.1.4 IAUs in MDAs&LGAs assessment 1,723,000 269,000 342,000 225,000 13.06 - 225,000 -100.00 -34.21 0%
4.1.5 IAUs and committees established 1,028,000 728,564 1,219,707 ∞ 153,800 773,000 292,907 -24.81 -59.80 25%
4.1.6. Pilot stage of computerised audit 1,018,000 319,000 135,500 402,000 39.49 319,000 83,000 0.00 -38.75 50%
4.1.7. Computerised audit in place - - 650,000 260,000 ∞ - 260,000 -60.00 0%
4.1.8. 70 Proect tech. audits conducted 535,000 197,000 228,000 477,150 626,900 117.18 116,750 228,000 282,150 -40.74 0.00 -40.87 70%
4.1.9 IA/CAG corrective measures status - - 25%
4.1.10 550 trained in risk based audit 1,263,000 425,000 433,000 451,650 1,249,150 98.90 364,500 433,000 451,650 -14.24 0.00 0.00 100%
4.1.11 300 trained re fraud risk 275,200 - - - -100.00 30%
4.1.12 Study to assess the ICT needs 147,680 - - - -100.00 0%
4.2 Strengthened external audit function 50,641,000 8,998,000 16,476,470 1,677,446 13,928,556 27.50 7,185,333 5,560,845 1,182,378 -20.15 -66.25 -29.51
4.2.1 Report on legal changes submitted 497,000 150,000 39,000 189,000 38.03 150,000 39,000 0.00 0.00 100%
4.2.1a Enhance CAG independence 143,800 143,800 ∞ - 143,800 0.00 0%
4.2.2. 100% moved to NAO offices 44,713,000 7,500,000 15,250,000 10,900 10,039,375 22.45 5,700,000 4,334,375 5,000 -24.00 -71.58 -54.13 85%
4.2.3 Train 300 risk based & 200 IT audit 900,000 300,000 289,570 595,760 66.20 306,190 289,570 2.06 0.00 70%
4.2.4 2 VFM audit reports each year 161,000 61,000 76,889 106,828 66.35 29,939 76,889 -50.92 0.00 100%
4.2.5. Train 300 international standards 431,000 293,000 384,150 677,489 157.19 293,339 384,150 0.12 0.00 50%
4.2.6 Parastatals audit modalities agreed 135,000 50,000 177,850 227,850 168.78 50,000 177,850 0.00 0.00 50%
4.2.7 Audit in line with ISSAIs guidelines 357,000 317,000 322,675 90.39 322,675 1.79 100%
4.2.8 Study re o/s matters database 150,000 150,000 104,500 254,500 169.67 150,000 104,500 0.00 0.00 100%
4.2.9 Establish a database 250,000 - 186,027 96,027 38.41 - 96,027 -48.38 100%
4.2.10 300 trained on ACL 850,000 - 260,750 188,000 448,750 52.79 - 260,750 188,000 0.00 0.00 70%
4.2.11 NAO HQ connected to 10 ROs 1,977,000 177,000 250,500 307,102 15.53 183,190 123,912 3.50 -50.53 100%
4.2.12 2 of 5 Team Mate modules applied 220,000 - 148,500 643,480 519,400 236.09 - 148,500 370,900 0.00 -42.36 60%
4.3 Better transparency on audit reports 668,000 198,000 220,835 161,410 496,025 74.26 204,190 220,835 71,000 3.13 0.00 -56.01
4.3.1 Citizen audit reports available 668,000 198,000 220,835 161,410 496,025 74.26 204,190 220,835 71,000 3.13 0.00 -56.01 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 154 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight 70,002,717 15,607,000 26,323,883 11,159,816 32,418,879 46.31 12,833,807 14,010,758 5,574,314 -17.77 -46.78 -50.05
4.4: Improved performance of parastatals 2,415,000 910,000 1,628,800 1,943,000 2,921,800 120.99 - 1,628,800 1,293,000 -100.00 0.00 -33.45
4.4.1 10 sign performance contracts 575,000 - 120,000 257,500 355,000 61.74 - 120,000 235,000 0.00 -8.74 100%
4.4.2 Database on Parastatals set up - - - - 60%
4.4.3 M&E for compliance rate set up - - 51,000 524,380 292,000 ∞ - 51,000 241,000 0.00 -54.04 0%
4.4.4 New TR's Bill presented 230,000 230,000 300,500 387,000 677,500 294.57 - 300,500 377,000 -100.00 0.00 -2.58 95%
4.4.5 150 Parastatals’ acts reviewed 361,000 237,000 274,000 274,000 75.90 - 274,000 -100.00 0.00 0%
4.4.6 TR’s Office capacities enhanced 1,249,000 443,000 883,300 774,120 1,323,300 105.95 - 883,300 440,000 -100.00 0.00 -43.16 90%
4.5: Strengthened capacity of PAC 6,323,000 428,000 974,695 683,720 1,709,068 27.03 434,373 974,695 300,000 1.49 0.00 -56.12
4.5.1 Annual capacity building interventions 6,323,000 428,000 974,695 683,720 1,709,068 27.03 434,373 974,695 300,000 1.49 0.00 -56.12 50%
4.6 Better PE procurement performances 3,969,717 3,449,000 4,684,083 3,246,625 8,586,069 216.29 3,686,861 3,931,583 967,625 6.90 -16.07 -70.20
4.6.1 Annual PPRA audit results confirm 66,000 66,000 779,750 1,022,900 911,850 1381.59 66,200 779,750 65,900 0.30 0.00 -93.56 100%
4.6.2 Implementation and monitoring tools 88,000 88,000 26,000 114,100 129.66 88,100 26,000 0.11 0.00 100%
4.6.3 New PPA regulations and tools 1,717 1,060,000 129,992 192,300 317,667 18501.28 78,800 129,992 108,875 -92.57 0.00 -43.38 100%
4.6.4 Procure. & strategic plans aligned - - - - 25%
4.6.5 VFM thru framework contracts 566,000 256,000 400,000 455,900 80.55 55,900 400,000 -78.16 0.00 50%
4.6.6 PPRA operational with outreach 2,112,000 843,000 2,640,492 1,461,125 4,124,583 195.29 1,819,091 1,887,992 417,500 115.79 -28.50 -71.43 80%
4.6.7 All PEs have functional PMIS 1,136,000 1,136,000 594,835 82,500 1,243,105 109.43 644,020 594,835 4,250 -43.31 0.00 -94.85 90%
4.6.8 e-procurement at pilot stage - - 438,600 345,100 ∞ - 345,100 -21.32 0%
4.6.9 Annual audits one-third of all PEs - - 23,200 934,750 ∞ 934,750 - -100.00 10%
4.6.10 Annual follow up audit 100 PEs - - - - 75%
4.6.11 Annual Proc. Perf. Eval. Report - - 139,014 139,014 ∞ - 139,014 0.00 100%
4.7. HCMIS in service delivery points - - - 499,999 192,532 ∞ - - 192,532 -61.49
4.7.1 User requirements for 160 SDPs 114,332 114,332 ∞ 114,332 0.00 0%
4.7.2 HCMIS at 160 SDPs 385,667 78,200 ∞ 78,200 -79.72 0%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 155 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management63,128,000 9,396,000 9,906,502 14,135,300 16,167,864 25.61 5,986,329 7,777,865 3,778,670 -36.29 -21.49 -73.27
5.1 Coordinate integration of fin. systems 3,839,000 823,000 2,378,270 3,265,900 3,800,972 99.01 556,467 2,108,270 1,136,235 -32.39 -11.35 -65.21
5.1.1 ICT mapping exercise 312,000 312,000 210,686 67.53 210,686 -32.47 100%
5.1.2 Stakeholder coordination meetings 168,000 168,000 230,000 64,000 38.10 4,000 60,000 -97.62 -73.91 100%
5.1.3 Prioritized and costed action plan 1,104,000 5,000 912,000 917,000 83.06 5,000 912,000 0.00 0.00 100%
5.1.4. Integration plan implemented 1,104,000 - 450,000 1,230,000 663,435 60.09 - 350,000 313,435 -22.22 -74.52 0%
5.1.5 IFMS in 35 LGAs, RSs and PMORALG 254,000 254,000 1,885,100 943,960 371.64 253,960 690,000 -0.02 -63.40 0%
5.1.6. EPICOR linked PMO-RALG IFMS - - 150,800 132,800 ∞ - 132,800 -11.94 100%
5.1.7 Capacity building to new key users 84,000 84,000 459,920 542,741 646.12 82,821 459,920 -1.40 0.00 0%
5.1.8. Audit of IFMIS in LGAs conducted 813,000 - 326,350 326,350 40.14 - 326,350 0.00 0%
5.2 EPICOR modules use increased 34,957,000 4,239,000 1,639,847 5,423,000 2,625,340 7.51 1,942,021 1,608,398 449,921 -54.19 -1.92 -91.70
5.2.1 EPICOR system upgrade 442,000 442,000 937,500 593,000 1,657,464 374.99 350,000 906,051 401,413 -20.81 -3.35 -32.31 100%
5.2.2 ACGEN staff capacity enhanced 34,160,000 3,703,000 330,000 167,508 0.49 119,000 48,508 -96.79 -85.30 100%
Office accommodation constructed all zones 4,500,000 1,375,000 -
5.2.3 Training on upgraded modules 355,000 94,000 702,347 800,368 225.46 98,021 702,347 4.28 0.00 50%
5.3 Software & module upgrades coordinated1,348,000 358,000 902,000 870,000 1,098,627 81.50 230,063 652,000 216,564 -35.74 -27.72 -75.11
5.3.1 FISM is operationalized 81,000 81,000 482,000 630,000 313,000 386.42 81,000 232,000 - 0.00 -51.87 -100.00 0%
5.3.2 FISM staff capacity enhanced 1,267,000 277,000 420,000 240,000 785,627 62.01 149,063 420,000 216,564 -46.19 0.00 -9.77 0%
5.4 Public access to fiscal information 317,000 266,000 623,500 494,900 731,300 230.69 170,500 388,400 172,400 -35.90 -37.71 -65.16
5.4.1 Support Budget Division & PAD - 350,400 161,100 208,500 ∞ - 168,500 40,000 -51.91 -75.17 50%
5.4.2 MoF Communication Strategy 317,000 266,000 200,100 70,000 415,400 131.04 154,500 190,900 70,000 -41.92 -4.60 0.00 95%
5.4.3 Action plan for MoF website - 73,000 263,800 107,400 ∞ 16,000 29,000 62,400 -60.27 -76.35 100%
5.5 Coordinate & Standardise PFM Training 516,000 281,000 407,000 320,000 747,500 144.86 110,500 347,000 290,000 -60.68 -14.74 -9.38
5.5.1 Training mapping exercise 112,000 112,000 107,000 95.54 107,000 -4.46 100%
5.5.2 Capacity building plan 169,000 169,000 168,500 153,500 90.83 3,500 150,000 -97.93 -10.98 50%
5.5.3. Impact assessment PFM training 235,000 - 238,500 320,000 487,000 207.23 - 197,000 290,000 -17.40 -9.38 0%
5.6 Comp'nt managers multi-year op. plans 266,000 81,000 95,500 98,500 205,000 77.07 61,000 95,500 48,500 -24.69 0.00 -50.76
5.6.1. Annual activities in multi-year plan 266,000 81,000 95,500 98,500 205,000 77.07 61,000 95,500 48,500 -24.69 0.00 -50.76 100%
5.7 Activities planned and implemented 2,490,000 690,000 855,086 614,000 1,184,218 47.56 432,518 371,700 380,000 -37.32 -56.53 -38.11
5.7.1 Chnge mang. / strat. plan. training 2,288,000 488,000 371,700 334,000 702,072 30.68 230,372 371,700 100,000 -52.79 0.00 -70.06 100%
5.7.2 Results based manag. training 202,000 202,000 483,386 280,000 482,146 238.69 202,146 - 280,000 0.07 -100.00 0.00 100%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 156 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management63,128,000 9,396,000 9,906,502 14,135,300 16,167,864 25.61 5,986,329 7,777,865 3,778,670 -36.29 -21.49 -73.27
5.8 Coordination of activities and support 4,470,000 1,192,000 1,216,200 650,000 1,986,258 44.44 1,108,760 651,448 226,050 -6.98 -46.44 -65.22
5.8.1 Secretariat procurement process 852,000 374,000 120,000 14.08 120,000 -67.91 100%
5.8.2 Secretariat work plan annually 18,000 18,000 - - -100.00 100%
5.8.3 Coord. secretariat facilitated annually 3,600,000 800,000 800,000 650,000 1,151,878 32.00 494,380 431,448 226,050 -38.20 -46.07 -65.22 50%
5.8.3 Coord. secretariat facilitated annually 416,200 714,380 ∞ 494,380 220,000 -47.14
5.9 Program with clearly defined milestones 75,000 75,000 130,000 130,000 210,000 280.00 50,000 130,000 30,000 -33.33 0.00 -76.92
5.9.1. Annual revision of M&E framework 75,000 75,000 130,000 130,000 210,000 280.00 50,000 130,000 30,000 -33.33 0.00 -76.92 100%
5.10 Reforms coordinated with stakeholders 596,000 199,000 505,143 579,400 658,693 110.52 224,000 358,693 76,000 12.56 -28.99 -86.88
5.10.1 PFM information session 130,000 130,000 130,000 100.00 130,000 0.00 0%
5.10.2 1 annual PFM reform info. day 466,000 69,000 505,143 579,400 528,693 113.45 94,000 358,693 76,000 36.23 -28.99 -86.88 0%
5.11: PFMRP result based management 4,000,000 438,000 558,600 664,600 1,070,600 26.77 346,500 471,100 253,000 -20.89 -15.66 -61.93
5.11.1 Annual work plan & milestones met 811,000 111,000 277,500 219,000 286,000 35.27 96,000 190,000 - -13.51 -31.53 -100.00 0%
5.11.2 Annual supervision mission 2,258,000 169,000 91,000 41,000 206,000 9.12 74,000 91,000 41,000 -56.21 0.00 0.00 60%
5.11.3 Independent prog. evaluations 225,000 245,000 ∞ 95,000 150,000 -33.33 100%
5.11.4 Dialogue structures working 931,000 158,000 190,100 179,600 333,600 35.83 81,500 190,100 62,000 -48.42 0.00 -65.48 30%
5.12 Intergovernmental transfers rationalized 254,000 254,000 95,356 25,000 349,356 137.54 254,000 95,356 - 0.00 0.00 -100.00
5.12.1 TORs completed 30,000 30,000 30,000 100.00 30,000 0.00 100%
5.12.2 Mapping commences - - - - 100%
5.12.3 Review initiated inception report 224,000 224,000 224,000 100.00 224,000 0.00 100%
5.12.4 Comprehensive action plan - - 53,456 53,456 ∞ - 53,456 0.00 100%
5.12.5. Reports produced annually - - 41,900 25,000 41,900 ∞ - 41,900 - 0.00 -100.00 0%
5.13 Improved PFM Reforms in Zanzibar 10,000,000 500,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 15.00 500,000 500,000 500,000 0.00 0.00 -50.00
5.13.1. DPs, ZNZ and MoF strategic plan 10,000,000 500,000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500,000 15.00 500,000 500,000 500,000 0.00 0.00 -50.00 0%
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 157 | P a g e
Appendix 8 – Budget compared with actual releases for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m)
Output
Milestone 2012-17 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub Program 2,764,959 - 519,000 2,245,959 1,569,968 56.78 - 519,000 1,276,168 0.00 -43.18
6.3 LGA receive 40% and 90% of devt budget 357,956 - - 357,956 275,057 76.84 - - 275,057 -23.16
6.3.1 Improve fiscal transfer mechanism 8,760 8,760 8,760 100.00 8,760 0.00 50%
Update strategic plans & aligned budgets 168,858 168,858 157,683 93.38 157,683 -6.62
6.3.2 Monitor resource flows LGAs to LLGs 180,338 180,338 108,614 60.23 108,614 -39.77 50%
6.4 Own Revenue Mobilizatin Doubled 176,567 - - 176,567 42,965 24.33 - - 42,965 -75.67
6.4.1 Tax payers database (I-Tax) 176,567 176,567 42,965 24.33 42,965 -75.67 50%
6.5 PFM Capacity in RA strengthened 145,200 - - 145,200 108,300 74.59 - - 108,300 -25.41
6.5.1 Regional PFM Champs created 145,200 145,200 108,300 74.59 108,300 -25.41 100%
6.6 Budget Execution Improved by LGAs 844,376 - 519,000 325,376 463,560 54.90 - 519,000 169,760 0.00 -47.83
6.6.1. Financial management improved 619,176 293,800 325,376 463,560 74.87 293,800 169,760 25%
6.6.1. Financial management improved 225,200 225,200 225,200 100.00 225,200 0.00
6.7 Improved Financial Reporting by LGAs 420,849 - - 420,849 368,467 87.55 - - 368,467 -12.45
6.7.1 Utilization of IFMIS finan. Rep. improv 187,200 187,200 183,122 97.82 183,122 0%
6.7.1 Utilization of IFMIS finan. Rep. improv 130,197 130,197 108,153 83.07 108,153 -16.93
6.7.2 Sumit annual finan. rep. to CAG Audit 103,452 103,452 77,192 74.62 77,192 -25.38 100%
6.8 95% LGA get unqualified opinion from CAG318,773 - - 318,773 176,790 55.46 - - 176,790 -44.54
6.8.1 Imple. Of inter and exter. Audit recomm 318,773 318,773 176,790 55.46 176,790 -44.54 95%
6.9 80% of LGAs meet IAGD st benchmarks - - - - - - - -
6.9.1. - -
6.10 Undertake fraud prevent. and anticorrup. measures146,573 - - 146,573 67,829 46.28 - - 67,829 -53.72
6.10.1 Fraud prevention plan implemented 146,573 146,573 67,829 46.28 67,829 -53.72 0%
6.11 Key Fiscal Information made public 156,505 - - 156,505 67,000 42.81 - - 67,000 -57.19
6.11.1 Financial Transparency improved 156,505 156,505 67,000 42.81 67,000 -57.19 0%
6.12 Local PEFA assessment undertaken 198,160 - - 198,160 - - - - -100.00
6.12.1 Local PEFA assessment done - - 95%
Submission of quartely IA Report 98,160 98,160 - - -100.00
LGA sensitized on new PPA 2013 100,000 100,000 - - -100.00
Budgets (TZS 000's) Fund Released (TZS 000's) % Variance (Budget/Actual) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 158 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditurefor key result areas, outputs and milestones
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
Whole of PFMRP IV 173,435,676 64,984,960 37.47 22,933,615 29,128,053 14,518,292 41,557,794 23.96 16,980,949 18,916,905 5,659,940 -36.05 -25.96 -35.06 -61.02
KRA 1 Revenue Management 8,291,000 3,221,767 38.86 1,020,830 1,423,940 776,997 1,980,050 23.88 766,335 954,088 259,627 -38.54 -24.93 -33.00 -66.59
1.1 Improved quality of forecasting 1,224,000 277,700 22.69 112,000 165,700 - 112,200 9.17 59,500 52,700 - -59.60 -46.88 -68.20
1.1.1 Study to identify and action plan - - 0.00 - - - - - 0%
1.1.2 Team of trainers developed 1,224,000 277,700 22.69 112,000 165,700 112,200 9.17 59,500 52,700 -59.60 -46.88 -68.20 100%
1.2 Improve domest. rev. mobilization 819,000 803,750 98.14 368,000 278,250 157,500 473,889 57.86 281,005 161,560 31,324 -41.04 -23.64 -41.94 -80.11
1.2.1 Study NTR Collection Systems 452,000 252,000 55.75 252,000 204,614 45.27 204,614 -18.80 -18.80 100%
1.2.2 Recommendations action plan - - - 100%
1.2.3 Action plan incorporated - - - - - 25%
1.2.4 Tax Admin. Bill submission 63,000 126,000 200.00 63,000 63,000 52,000 82.54 52,000 - -58.73 -17.46 -100.00 100%
1.2.5 Review LG revenue system laws - - - - - 50%
1.2.6 Nat. resource rev. mobilisation - - - - - 0%
1.2.7 Computerized rev. collection 127,000 217,250 171.06 - 162,250 55,000 192,884 151.88 - 161,560 31,324 -11.22 -0.43 -43.05 25%
1.2.8 Review tax exempt and VAT Act 177,000 208,500 117.80 53,000 53,000 102,500 24,391 13.78 24,391 - - -88.30 -53.98 -100.00 -100.00 100%
1.3 Improve LG capacity to collect rev. 5,544,000 1,303,013 23.50 317,800 600,930 384,283 981,533 17.70 317,800 435,430 228,303 -24.67 0.00 -27.54 -40.59
1.3.1 Assess and eval. Rev. potential 253,000 252,800 99.92 150,000 102,800 252,800 99.92 150,000 102,800 0.00 0.00 0.00 100%
1.3.2 LGAs tax admin. Training 608,000 27,703 4.56 - 27,703 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
1.3.3 PMORALG & RS staff tax trained 100,000 100,000 100.00 100,000 100,000 100.00 100,000 0.00 0.00 100%
1.3.4 LGA & RS rev. manag. trained 2,686,000 - - - - 0%
1.3.5 Data base PMORALG & RS 1,757,000 657,610 37.43 - 498,130 159,480 382,426 21.77 - 332,630 49,796 -41.85 -33.22 -68.78 80%
1.3.6 LG Finances Act Study 68,000 106,105 156.04 31,500 74,605 101,124 148.71 31,500 69,624 -4.69 0.00 -6.68 100%
1.3.7 LG Finances Bill submitted 72,000 42,800 59.44 36,300 6,500 36,300 50.42 36,300 - -15.19 0.00 -100.00 80%
1.3.8 LGA fin. management improved - 115,995 ∞ 115,995 108,883 ∞ 108,883 -6.13 -6.13 50%
1.4 DP funds thru exchequer system 704,000 837,304 118.94 223,030 379,060 235,214 412,428 58.58 108,030 304,398 - -50.74 -51.56 -19.70 -100.00
1.4.1 Dev. Coop. framework operates 227,000 296,890 130.79 108,030 88,060 100,800 193,428 85.21 108,030 85,398 - -34.85 0.00 -3.02 -100.00 95%
1.4.2 Revised JAST and AMP commu. 194,000 419,088 216.02 115,000 217,000 87,088 145,000 74.74 - 145,000 - -65.40 -100.00 -33.18 -100.00 100%
1.4.3 Project Fund Port. Disbursed exch. 283,000 121,326 42.87 - 74,000 47,326 74,000 26.15 - 74,000 - -39.01 0.00 -100.00 100%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 159 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 2 Budgeting and planning 9,627,000 2,278,159 23.66 909,219 1,063,790 305,150 537,647 5.58 187,829 349,818 - -76.40 -79.34 -67.12 -100.00
2.1 Program based budgeting (PBB) 2,937,000 1,021,850 34.79 305,800 457,600 258,450 232,500 7.92 97,410 135,090 - -77.25 -68.15 -70.48 -100.00
2.1.1 Define sub-progs and PIs 250,000 388,350 155.34 125,000 218,200 45,150 197,960 79.18 62,870 135,090 - -49.03 -49.70 -38.09 -100.00 50%
2.1.2 Chart of accounts modified 506,000 147,000 29.05 74,000 73,000 16,170 3.20 16,170 - -89.00 -78.15 -100.00 100%
2.1.3 Review MTEF - PBB compatible 1,283,000 368,500 28.72 28,800 126,400 213,300 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 -100.00 -100.00 50%
2.1.4 Progress on PBB action plan - - - - 0%
2.1.5 Phased training MDAs and RSs 436,000 79,000 18.12 39,000 40,000 18,370 4.21 18,370 - -76.75 -52.90 -100.00 0%
2.1.6 Phased training LGAs 462,000 39,000 8.44 39,000 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
2.2 Utilization of budgeting tools 6,101,000 911,890 14.95 303,000 562,190 46,700 170,728 2.80 - 170,728 - -81.28 -100.00 -69.63 -100.00
2.2.1 MTSPBM reviewed 374,000 252,190 67.43 57,000 195,190 - 64,860 17.34 - 64,860 - -74.28 -100.00 -66.77 95%
2.2.2 All MTSPBM trained 1,227,000 140,000 11.41 - 140,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
2.2.3 MTSPBM to be applied - - - - - 50%
2.2.4 Annexes to vol. II for EAs 687,000 167,700 24.41 61,000 60,000 46,700 58,000 8.44 - 58,000 - -65.41 -100.00 -3.33 -100.00 0%
2.2.5 Action plan on legal framework - 167,000 ∞ - 167,000 - 47,868 ∞ - 47,868 - -71.34 -71.34 100%
2.2.6 10 PER main dialogue meetings 1,900,000 125,000 6.58 125,000 - - -100.00 -100.00 70%
2.2.7 Budget committees training 1,609,000 20,000 1.24 20,000 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 50%
2.2.8 QA of qutr. budget reports 304,000 40,000 13.16 40,000 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
2.2.9 Reallocation warrants published - - 100%
2.2.10 GoT approves actions - - 0%
2.3 LGAs MTEF preparation capacity 379,000 134,419 35.47 90,419 44,000 - 134,419 35.47 90,419 44,000 - 0.00 0.00 0.00
2.3.1 Guideline includes budget info 65,000 42,575 65.50 42,575 42,575 65.50 42,575 0.00 0.00 100%
2.3.2 LGA studies budget allocation 54,000 47,844 88.60 47,844 - 47,844 88.60 47,844 - 0.00 0.00 100%
2.3.3 Agree LGAs allocation formulae 58,000 - - - - - - 90%
2.3.4 All formulae reviewed 44,000 44,000 100.00 - 44,000 44,000 100.00 - 44,000 0.00 0.00 0%
2.3.5 Budget allocation formulae used 131,000 - - - - 0%
2.3.6 Monitor actual vs formula-based 27,000 - - - - 0%
2.4 Budget docs quality & public access 210,000 210,000 100.00 210,000 - - - - - - -100.00 -100.00
2.4.1 Public access fiscal information 122,000 122,000 100.00 122,000 - - -100.00 -100.00 100%
2.4.2. Plan for improving budget docs 72,000 72,000 100.00 72,000 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
2.4.3 Changes in budget docs 16,000 16,000 100.00 16,000 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 160 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 3 Budget Exec., Accountblity & Trnsp. 19,622,000 9,817,503 50.03 2,677,810 4,332,700 2,806,993 4,463,801 22.75 936,451 2,308,139 1,219,211 -54.53 -65.03 -46.73 -56.57
3.1 Improved public sector procurement 2,788,000 2,099,040 75.29 544,500 806,000 748,540 1,024,706 36.75 354,174 407,333 263,199 -51.18 -34.95 -49.46 -64.84
3.1.1 Action plan for PPA - - - - - 0%
3.1.2 New procurement regulations 174,000 - - - - 100%
3.1.3 Procurement TNA exercise 413,000 418,387 101.30 178,000 85,000 155,387 330,039 79.91 178,000 63,346 88,693 -21.12 0.00 -25.48 -42.92 100%
3.1.4 [300] procurement staff trained - - - - - 0%
3.1.5 PMU Strategy 73,000 73,000 100.00 73,000 - 64,525 88.39 64,525 - -11.61 -11.61 100%
3.1.6 Procurement staff database 258,000 276,312 107.10 25,500 141,500 109,312 215,682 83.60 3,176 141,500 71,006 -21.94 -87.55 0.00 -35.04 60%
3.1.7 National procurement policy draft - - - - - 95%
3.1.8 Stakeholders’ comments incorp. - - - - - 100%
3.1.9 PPPDs’ capacity enhanced 665,000 289,500 43.53 100,000 189,500 111,202 16.72 89,702 21,500 -61.59 -10.30 -88.65 75%
3.1.10 20 PPPD staff with skills - 145,000 ∞ - 145,000 141,487 ∞ - 141,487 -2.42 -2.42 70%
3.1.11 National procurement policy 446,000 317,500 71.19 64,000 253,500 18,771 4.21 18,771 - -94.09 -70.67 -100.00 95%
3.1.12 Nat. proc. policy strategy 327,000 330,000 100.92 104,000 181,000 45,000 61,000 18.65 - 61,000 - -81.52 -100.00 -66.30 -100.00 0%
3.1.13 Printing and NPP on the website - - - - - 0%
3.1.14 NPP and law synchronised 114,000 - - - - - - 0%
3.1.15 Monitoring NPP implementation - - - - - - - 0%
3.1.16 NPP implement eval. & feedback - - - - - 0%
3.1.17 1000 Stakeholders know NPP 318,000 87,841 27.62 - 87,841 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
3.1.18 Strategy on Stakeholders awareness 161,500 ∞ 161,500 82,000 ∞ 82,000 -49.23 -49.23 50%
3.2 Strengthened cash management 4,956,000 829,000 16.73 233,000 294,500 301,500 790,183 15.94 199,183 294,500 296,500 -4.68 -14.51 0.00 -1.66
3.2.1 600 cash management trained 4,956,000 829,000 16.73 233,000 294,500 301,500 790,183 15.94 199,183 294,500 296,500 -4.68 -14.51 0.00 -1.66 50%
3.2.2 6 bank ac/s for each LGA - - - - - 100%
3.2.3. Monthly ACGEN arrears report - - - 100%
3.3 Public debt management capacity 2,060,000 192,300 9.33 - - 192,300 - - - - -100.00 -100.00
3.3.1 Debt manage actions shared - - - - - 100%
3.3.2 Debt management policy 316,000 - - - - 100%
3.3.3 50 Public debt management staff - - - - - 0%
3.3.4 Review of GLG&G Act 254,000 - - - - 95%
3.3.5 Debt management department 1,490,000 81,800 5.49 - 81,800 - - - -100.00 -100.00 95%
3.3.6. Monitoring contingent liabilities - - - - - 0%
3.3.7. Monitoring of guarantees - 110,500 ∞ 110,500 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
3.3.8. Quarterly debt report - - - 100%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 161 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 3 Budget Exec., Accountblity & Trnsp. 19,622,000 9,817,503 50.03 2,677,810 4,332,700 2,806,993 4,463,801 22.75 936,451 2,308,139 1,219,211 -54.53 -65.03 -46.73 -56.57
3.4 Improved government fin. statements 1,327,000 1,749,966 131.87 471,738 1,102,200 176,028 1,457,454 109.83 280,506 1,060,708 116,240 -16.72 -40.54 -3.76 -33.97
3.4.1 Review of the IPSAS guideline - - - - - 0%
3.4.2 Develop IPSAS accrual awareness 95,000 103,205 108.64 103,205 39,920 42.02 39,920 -61.32 -61.32 100%
3.4.3 Capacity building 250 staff - 153,000 ∞ 153,000 152,973 ∞ 152,973 -0.02 -0.02 100%
3.4.4 Review PF legislation for accrual 242,000 30,000 12.40 30,000 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 25%
3.4.5 Consolidated template of fin. stats. 138,000 29,000 21.01 29,000 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 100%
3.4.6 250 trained IPSAS&Epicor accrual 360,000 - - - - - 0%
3.4.7 Plan for migration to accrual 215,000 1,016,361 472.73 31,633 808,700 176,028 891,426 414.62 7,813 767,373 116,240 -12.29 -75.30 -5.11 -33.97 100%
3.4.8. Plan approved & shared 120,000 70,900 59.08 70,900 65,800 54.83 65,800 -7.19 -7.19 0%
3.4.9 Legal & policy supports decisions 157,000 54,000 34.39 54,000 14,000 8.92 14,000 -74.07 -74.07 0%
3.4.10 Milestones identified & approved - - - - - 0%
3.4.11 Consolidated accrual based ac/s 293,500 ∞ - 293,500 293,335 ∞ - 293,335 -0.06 -0.06 60%
3.4.12 Fin. stats. on econ. class & sector - - 0%
3.5 Improved accounting of gov. assets 8,491,000 4,947,197 58.26 1,428,572 2,130,000 1,388,625 1,191,458 14.03 102,588 545,598 543,272 -75.92 -92.82 -74.39 -60.88
3.5.1 70 additional MDAs in EPICOR 89,000 236,000 265.17 66,000 170,000 - 58,292 65.50 58,292 - - -75.30 -11.68 -100.00 60%
3.5.2 Asset manage. software in use 1,412,000 552,000 39.09 122,000 430,000 - 1,946 0.14 - 1,946 - -99.65 -100.00 -99.55 100%
3.5.3 GAM capacity enhanced 484,000 431,530 89.16 130,000 120,000 181,530 164,296 33.95 44,296 120,000 - -61.93 -65.93 0.00 -100.00 100%
3.5.4. Asset manage. policy submitted 451,000 295,700 65.57 165,700 130,000 - 82,981 18.40 - 82,981 - -71.94 -100.00 -36.17 95%
3.5.5. Valuation 34 MDAs and RSs 6,055,000 3,431,967 56.68 944,872 1,280,000 1,207,095 883,943 14.60 - 340,671 543,272 -74.24 -100.00 -73.39 -54.99 100%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 162 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight 70,002,717 32,418,879 46.31 12,833,807 14,010,758 5,574,314 23,801,549 34.00 11,273,984 9,495,429 3,032,136 -26.58 -12.15 -32.23 -45.61
4.1 Increased internal audit function 5,986,000 4,584,829 76.59 1,323,050 1,694,000 1,567,779 2,961,262 49.47 373,957 1,420,905 1,166,400 -35.41 -71.74 -16.12 -25.60
4.1.1 Operational plan approved - - - - - 100%
4.1.2. IA improvement prog. in place 1,447,000 369,000 25.50 369,000 174,427 12.05 174,427 -52.73 -52.73 100%
4.1.3 450 IAs trained on procedures 233,072 ∞ - 233,072 233,072 ∞ - 233,072 0.00 0.00 25%
4.1.4 IAUs in MDAs&LGAs assessment 1,723,000 225,000 13.06 - 225,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
4.1.5 IAUs and committees established 1,219,707 ∞ 153,800 773,000 292,907 1,066,214 ∞ 51,300 773,000 241,914 -12.58 -66.64 0.00 -17.41 25%
4.1.6. Pilot stage of computerised audit 1,018,000 402,000 39.49 319,000 83,000 85,327 8.38 33,000 52,327 -78.77 -89.66 -36.96 50%
4.1.7. Computerised audit in place - 260,000 ∞ - 260,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
4.1.8. 70 Proect tech. audits conducted 535,000 626,900 117.18 116,750 228,000 282,150 482,662 90.22 15,537 228,000 239,125 -23.01 -86.69 0.00 -15.25 70%
4.1.9 IA/CAG corrective measures status - - - - 25%
4.1.10 550 trained in risk based audit 1,263,000 1,249,150 98.90 364,500 433,000 451,650 919,560 72.81 99,693 419,905 399,962 -26.39 -72.65 -3.02 -11.44 100%
4.1.11 300 trained re fraud risk - - - - - - 30%
4.1.12 Study to assess the ICT needs - - - - - - 0%
4.2 Strengthened external audit function 50,641,000 13,928,556 27.50 7,185,333 5,560,845 1,182,378 12,564,274 24.81 7,185,333 4,626,375 752,566 -9.79 0.00 -16.80 -36.35
4.2.1 Report on legal changes submitted 497,000 189,000 38.03 150,000 39,000 189,000 38.03 150,000 39,000 0.00 0.00 0.00 100%
4.2.1a Enhance CAG independence 143,800 ∞ - 143,800 96,000 -100.00 -33.24 0%
4.2.2. 100% moved to NAO offices 44,713,000 10,039,375 22.45 5,700,000 4,334,375 5,000 10,038,575 22.45 5,700,000 4,334,375 4,200 -0.01 0.00 0.00 -16.00 85%
4.2.3 Train 300 risk based & 200 IT audit 900,000 595,760 66.20 306,190 289,570 306,190 34.02 306,190 - -48.61 0.00 -100.00 70%
4.2.4 2 VFM audit reports each year 161,000 106,828 66.35 29,939 76,889 29,939 18.60 29,939 - -71.97 0.00 -100.00 100%
4.2.5. Train 300 international standards 431,000 677,489 157.19 293,339 384,150 293,339 68.06 293,339 - -56.70 0.00 -100.00 50%
4.2.6 Parastatals audit modalities agreed 135,000 227,850 168.78 50,000 177,850 94,000 69.63 50,000 44,000 -58.74 0.00 -75.26 50%
4.2.7 Audit in line with ISSAIs guidelines 357,000 322,675 90.39 322,675 322,675 90.39 322,675 0.00 0.00 100%
4.2.8 Study re o/s matters database 150,000 254,500 169.67 150,000 104,500 254,500 169.67 150,000 104,500 0.00 0.00 0.00 100%
4.2.9 Establish a database 250,000 96,027 38.41 - 96,027 90,360 36.14 - 90,360 -5.90 -5.90 100%
4.2.10 300 trained on ACL 850,000 448,750 52.79 - 260,750 188,000 188,000 22.12 - - 188,000 -58.11 -100.00 0.00 70%
4.2.11 NAO HQ connected to 10 ROs 1,977,000 307,102 15.53 183,190 123,912 230,296 11.65 183,190 47,106 -25.01 0.00 -61.98 100%
4.2.12 2 of 5 Team Mate modules applied 220,000 519,400 236.09 - 148,500 370,900 431,400 196.09 - 148,500 282,900 -16.94 0.00 -23.73 60%
4.3 Better transparency on audit reports 668,000 496,025 74.26 204,190 220,835 71,000 494,725 74.06 204,190 220,835 69,700 -0.26 0.00 0.00 -1.83
4.3.1 Citizen audit reports available 668,000 496,025 74.26 204,190 220,835 71,000 494,725 74.06 204,190 220,835 69,700 -0.26 0.00 0.00 -1.83 100%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 163 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 4 Budget Control and Oversight 70,002,717 32,418,879 46.31 12,833,807 14,010,758 5,574,314 23,801,549 34.00 11,273,984 9,495,429 3,032,136 -26.58 -12.15 -32.23 -45.61
4.4: Improved performance of parastatals 2,415,000 2,921,800 120.99 - 1,628,800 1,293,000 1,868,433 77.37 - 1,328,798 539,635 -36.05 -18.42 -58.26
4.4.1 10 sign performance contracts 575,000 355,000 61.74 - 120,000 235,000 338,384 58.85 - 107,584 230,800 -4.68 -10.35 -1.79 100%
4.4.2 Database on Parastatals set up - - - - - 60%
4.4.3 M&E for compliance rate set up - 292,000 ∞ - 51,000 241,000 54,329 ∞ - 47,782 6,547 -81.39 -6.31 -97.28 0%
4.4.4 New TR's Bill presented 230,000 677,500 294.57 - 300,500 377,000 267,579 116.34 - 267,579 - -60.50 -10.96 -100.00 95%
4.4.5 150 Parastatals’ acts reviewed 361,000 274,000 75.90 - 274,000 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
4.4.6 TR’s Office capacities enhanced 1,249,000 1,323,300 105.95 - 883,300 440,000 1,208,141 96.73 - 905,853 302,288 -8.70 2.55 -31.30 90%
4.5: Strengthened capacity of PAC 6,323,000 1,709,068 27.03 434,373 974,695 300,000 1,513,248 23.93 434,373 830,875 248,000 -11.46 0.00 -14.76 -17.33
4.5.1 Annual capacity building interventions 6,323,000 1,709,068 27.03 434,373 974,695 300,000 1,513,248 23.93 434,373 830,875 248,000 -11.46 0.00 -14.76 -17.33 50%
4.6 Better PE procurement performances 3,969,717 8,586,069 216.29 3,686,861 3,931,583 967,625 4,285,275 107.95 3,076,131 1,067,641 141,503 -50.09 -16.57 -72.84 -85.38
4.6.1 Annual PPRA audit results confirm 66,000 911,850 1381.59 66,200 779,750 65,900 428,911 649.87 66,200 362,711 - -52.96 0.00 -53.48 -100.00 100%
4.6.2 Implementation and monitoring tools 88,000 114,100 129.66 88,100 26,000 92,252 104.83 88,100 4,152 -19.15 0.00 -84.03 100%
4.6.3 New PPA regulations and tools 1,717 317,667 18501.28 78,800 129,992 108,875 209,838 12221.20 78,800 60,727 70,311 -33.94 0.00 -53.28 -35.42 100%
4.6.4 Procure. & strategic plans aligned - - - - - 25%
4.6.5 VFM thru framework contracts 566,000 455,900 80.55 55,900 400,000 261,752 46.25 55,900 205,852 -42.59 0.00 -48.54 50%
4.6.6 PPRA operational with outreach 2,112,000 4,124,583 195.29 1,819,091 1,887,992 417,500 2,101,385 99.50 1,819,091 216,254 66,040 -49.05 0.00 -88.55 -84.18 80%
4.6.7 All PEs have functional PMIS 1,136,000 1,243,105 109.43 644,020 594,835 4,250 248,784 21.90 33,290 214,494 1,000 -79.99 -94.83 -63.94 -76.47 90%
4.6.8 e-procurement at pilot stage - 345,100 ∞ - 345,100 - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
4.6.9 Annual audits one-third of all PEs - 934,750 ∞ 934,750 - 934,750 ∞ 934,750 - 0.00 0.00 10%
4.6.10 Annual follow up audit 100 PEs - - - - - 75%
4.6.11 Annual Proc. Perf. Eval. Report - 139,014 ∞ - 139,014 7,603 ∞ - 7,603 -94.53 -94.53 100%
4.7. HCMIS in service delivery points - 192,532 ∞ - - 192,532 114,332 ∞ - - 114,332 -40.62 -40.62
4.7.1 User requirements for 160 SDPs 114,332 ∞ 114,332 114,332 ∞ 114,332 0.00 0.00 0%
4.7.2 HCMIS at 160 SDPs 78,200 ∞ 78,200 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 164 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management63,128,000 15,453,484 24.48 5,491,949 7,777,865 3,778,670 10,038,348 15.90 3,816,350 5,587,307 634,691 -35.04 -30.51 -28.16 -83.20
5.1 Coordinate integration of fin. systems 3,839,000 3,800,972 99.01 556,467 2,108,270 1,136,235 1,687,228 43.95 474,273 1,082,739 130,216 -55.61 -14.77 -48.64 -88.54
5.1.1 ICT mapping exercise 312,000 210,686 67.53 210,686 130,698 41.89 130,698 -37.97 -37.97 100%
5.1.2 Stakeholder coordination meetings 168,000 64,000 38.10 4,000 60,000 54,788 32.61 3,959 50,829 -14.39 -1.03 -15.29 100%
5.1.3 Prioritized and costed action plan 1,104,000 917,000 83.06 5,000 912,000 248,475 22.51 2,835 245,640 -72.90 -43.30 -73.07 100%
5.1.4. Integration plan implemented 1,104,000 663,435 60.09 - 350,000 313,435 106,554 9.65 - - 106,554 -83.94 -100.00 -66.00 0%
5.1.5 IFMS in 35 LGAs, RSs and PMORALG 254,000 943,960 371.64 253,960 690,000 277,622 109.30 253,960 23,662 -70.59 0.00 -96.57 0%
5.1.6. EPICOR linked PMO-RALG IFMS - 132,800 ∞ - 132,800 - - - -100.00 -100.00 100%
5.1.7 Capacity building to new key users 84,000 542,741 646.12 82,821 459,920 542,741 646.12 82,821 459,920 0.00 0.00 0.00 0%
5.1.8. Audit of IFMIS in LGAs conducted 813,000 326,350 40.14 - 326,350 326,350 40.14 - 326,350 0.00 0.00 0%
5.2 EPICOR modules use increased 34,957,000 2,625,340 7.51 1,942,021 1,608,398 449,921 3,015,518 8.63 1,581,922 1,385,096 48,500 14.86 -18.54 -13.88 -89.22
5.2.1 EPICOR system upgrade 442,000 1,657,464 374.99 350,000 906,051 401,413 1,216,154 275.15 350,000 866,154 - -26.63 0.00 -4.40 -100.00 100%
5.2.2 ACGEN staff capacity enhanced 34,160,000 167,508 0.49 119,000 48,508 160,500 0.47 112,000 48,500 -4.18 -5.88 -0.02 100%
Office accommodation contructed all zones 1,375,000 - 1,023,116 1,023,116 -
5.2.3 Training on upgraded modules 355,000 800,368 225.46 98,021 702,347 615,748 173.45 96,806 518,942 -23.07 -1.24 -26.11 50%
5.3 Software & module upgrades coordinated 1,348,000 1,098,627 81.50 230,063 652,000 216,564 905,286 67.16 183,027 561,887 160,372 -17.60 -20.44 -13.82 -25.95
5.3.1 FISM is operationalized 81,000 313,000 386.42 81,000 232,000 - 280,417 346.19 48,417 232,000 - -10.41 -40.23 0.00 0%
5.3.2 FISM staff capacity enhanced 1,267,000 785,627 62.01 149,063 420,000 216,564 624,869 49.32 134,610 329,887 160,372 -20.46 -9.70 -21.46 -25.95 0%
5.4 Public access to fiscal information 317,000 731,300 230.69 170,500 388,400 172,400 538,925 170.01 154,500 321,951 62,474 -26.31 -9.38 -17.11 -63.76
5.4.1 Support Budget Division & PAD - 208,500 ∞ - 168,500 40,000 102,051 ∞ - 102,051 - -51.05 -39.44 -100.00 50%
5.4.2 MoF Communication Strategy 317,000 415,400 131.04 154,500 190,900 70,000 375,874 118.57 154,500 190,900 30,474 -9.52 0.00 0.00 -56.47 95%
5.4.3 Action plan for MoF website - 107,400 ∞ 16,000 29,000 62,400 61,000 ∞ - 29,000 32,000 -43.20 -100.00 0.00 -48.72 100%
5.5 Coordinate & Standardise PFM Training 516,000 747,500 144.86 110,500 347,000 290,000 222,100 43.04 72,100 150,000 - -70.29 -34.75 -56.77 -100.00
5.5.1 Training mapping exercise 112,000 107,000 95.54 107,000 72,100 64.38 72,100 -32.62 -32.62 100%
5.5.2 Capacity building plan 169,000 153,500 90.83 3,500 150,000 150,000 88.76 - 150,000 -2.28 -100.00 0.00 50%
5.5.3. Impact assessment PFM training 235,000 487,000 207.23 - 197,000 290,000 - - - - -100.00 -100.00 -100.00 0%
5.6 Comp'nt managers multi-year op. plans 266,000 205,000 77.07 61,000 95,500 48,500 156,500 58.83 61,000 95,500 - -23.66 0.00 0.00 -100.00
5.6.1. Annual activities in multi-year plan 266,000 205,000 77.07 61,000 95,500 48,500 156,500 58.83 61,000 95,500 - -23.66 0.00 0.00 -100.00 100%
5.7 Activities planned and implemented 2,490,000 1,184,218 47.56 432,518 371,700 380,000 803,273 32.26 431,573 371,700 - -32.17 -0.22 0.00 -100.00
5.7.1 Chnge mang. / strat. plan. training 2,288,000 702,072 30.68 230,372 371,700 100,000 602,072 26.31 230,372 371,700 - -14.24 0.00 0.00 -100.00 100%
5.7.2 Results based manag. training 202,000 482,146 238.69 202,146 - 280,000 201,201 99.60 201,201 - - -58.27 -0.47 -100.00 100%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 165 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 5 Change Management and Programme Management63,128,000 15,453,484 24.48 5,491,949 7,777,865 3,778,670 10,038,348 15.90 3,816,350 5,587,307 634,691 -35.04 -30.51 -28.16 -83.20
5.8 Coordination of activities and support 4,470,000 1,271,878 28.45 614,380 651,448 226,050 1,135,057 25.39 380,222 551,448 203,387 -10.76 -38.11 -15.35 -10.03
5.8.1 Secretariat procurement process 852,000 120,000 14.08 120,000 102,832 12.07 102,832 -14.31 -14.31 100%
5.8.2 Secretariat work plan annually 18,000 - - - - 100%
5.8.3 Coord. secretariat facilitated annually 3,600,000 1,151,878 32.00 494,380 431,448 226,050 912,225 25.34 277,390 431,448 203,387 -20.81 -43.89 0.00 -10.03 50%
5.8.3 Coord. secretariat facilitated annually 220,000 120,000 ∞ 120,000 -45.45
5.9 Program with clearly defined milestones 75,000 210,000 280.00 50,000 130,000 30,000 139,902 186.54 - 130,000 9,902 -33.38 -100.00 0.00 -66.99
5.9.1. Annual revision of M&E framework 75,000 210,000 280.00 50,000 130,000 30,000 139,902 186.54 - 130,000 9,902 -33.38 -100.00 0.00 -66.99 100%
5.10 Reforms coordinated with stakeholders 596,000 658,693 110.52 224,000 358,693 76,000 163,696 27.47 59,073 86,623 18,000 -75.15 -73.63 -75.85 -76.32
5.10.1 PFM information session 130,000 130,000 100.00 130,000 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
5.10.2 1 annual PFM reform info. day 466,000 528,693 113.45 94,000 358,693 76,000 163,696 35.13 59,073 86,623 18,000 -69.04 -37.16 -75.85 -76.32 0%
5.11: PFMRP result based management 4,000,000 1,070,600 26.77 346,500 471,100 253,000 772,275 19.31 299,335 471,100 1,840 -27.87 -13.61 0.00 -99.27
5.11.1 Annual work plan & milestones met 811,000 286,000 35.27 96,000 190,000 - 286,000 35.27 96,000 190,000 - 0.00 0.00 0.00 0%
5.11.2 Annual supervision mission 2,258,000 206,000 9.12 74,000 91,000 41,000 166,840 7.39 74,000 91,000 1,840 -19.01 0.00 0.00 -95.51 60%
5.11.3 Independent prog. evaluations 245,000 ∞ 95,000 150,000 50,000 ∞ 50,000 - -79.59 -47.37 -100.00 100%
5.11.4 Dialogue structures working 931,000 333,600 35.83 81,500 190,100 62,000 269,435 28.94 79,335 190,100 - -19.23 -2.66 0.00 -100.00 30%
5.12 Intergovernmental transfers rationalized 254,000 349,356 137.54 254,000 95,356 - 164,456 64.75 111,000 53,456 - -52.93 -56.30 -43.94
5.12.1 TORs completed 30,000 30,000 100.00 30,000 30,000 100.00 30,000 0.00 0.00 100%
5.12.2 Mapping commences - - - - - 100%
5.12.3 Review initiated inception report 224,000 224,000 100.00 224,000 81,000 36.16 81,000 -63.84 -63.84 100%
5.12.4 Comprehensive action plan - 53,456 ∞ - 53,456 53,456 ∞ - 53,456 0.00 0.00 100%
5.12.5. Reports produced annually - 41,900 ∞ - 41,900 - - - - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
5.13 Improved PFM Reforms in Zanzibar 10,000,000 1,500,000 15.00 500,000 500,000 500,000 334,132 3.34 8,325 325,807 - -77.72 -98.34 -34.84 -100.00
5.13.1. DPs, ZNZ and MoF strategic plan 10,000,000 1,500,000 15.00 500,000 500,000 500,000 334,132 3.34 8,325 325,807 - -77.72 -98.34 -34.84 -100.00 0%
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 166 | P a g e
Appendix 9 – Releases compared with actual expenditure for key result areas, outputs and milestones (cont.)
Key Result Area (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) (k) (l) (m) (n) (o) (p)
Output Budgets (TZS 000's)
Milestone 2012-17 2012-to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012 to date % 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2012-to date 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
KRA 6 LGA Reform Sub Program 2,764,959 1,795,168 64.93 - 519,000 1,276,168 736,399 26.63 - 222,124 514,275 -58.98 -57.20 -59.70
6.3 LGA receive 40% and 90% of devt budget 357,956 275,057 76.84 - - 275,057 82,982 23.18 - - 82,982 -69.83 -69.83
6.3.1 Improve fiscal transfer mechanism 8,760 8,760 100.00 8,760 - - -100.00 -100.00 50%
Update strategic plans & aligned budgets 168,858 157,683 93.38 157,683 53,227 31.52 53,227 -66.24 -66.24
6.3.2 Monitor resource flows LGAs to LLGs 180,338 108,614 60.23 108,614 29,755 16.50 29,755 -72.60 -72.60 50%
6.4 Own Revenue Mobilizatin Doubled 176,567 42,965 24.33 - - 42,965 - - - - -100.00 -100.00
6.4.1 Tax payers database (I-Tax) 176,567 42,965 24.33 42,965 - - -100.00 -100.00 50%
6.5 PFM Capacity in RA strengthened 145,200 108,300 74.59 - - 108,300 78,300 53.93 - - 78,300 -27.70 -27.70
6.5.1 Regional PFM Champs created 145,200 108,300 74.59 108,300 78,300 53.93 78,300 -27.70 -27.70 100%
6.6 Budget Execution Improved by LGAs 844,376 688,760 81.57 - 519,000 169,760 316,816 37.52 - 222,124 94,692 -54.00 -57.20 -44.22
6.6.1. Financial management improved 619,176 463,560 74.87 293,800 169,760 94,692 15.29 - 94,692 -79.57 -100.00 -44.22 25%
6.6.1. Financial management improved 225,200 225,200 100.00 225,200 222,124 98.63 222,124 -1.37 -1.37
6.7 Improved Financial Reporting by LGAs 420,849 368,467 87.55 - - 368,467 98,514 23.41 - - 98,514 -73.26 -73.26
6.7.1 Utilization of IFMIS finan. Rep. improv 187,200 183,122 97.82 183,122 - - -100.00 -100.00 0%
6.7.1 Utilization of IFMIS finan. Rep. improv 130,197 108,153 83.07 108,153 71,017 54.55 71,017 -34.34 -34.34
6.7.2 Sumit annual finan. rep. to CAG Audit 103,452 77,192 74.62 77,192 27,497 26.58 27,497 -64.38 -64.38 100%
6.8 95% LGA get unqualified opinion from CAG 318,773 176,790 55.46 - - 176,790 97,079 30.45 - - 97,079 -45.09 -45.09
6.8.1 Imple. Of inter and exter. Audit recomm 318,773 176,790 55.46 176,790 97,079 30.45 97,079 -45.09 -45.09 95%
6.9 80% of LGAs meet IAGD st benchmarks - - - - - - - - -
6.9.1. - - -
6.10 Undertake fraud prevent. and anticorrup. measures146,573 67,829 46.28 - - 67,829 34,975 23.86 - - 34,975 -48.44 -48.44
6.10.1 Fraud prevention plan implemented 146,573 67,829 46.28 67,829 34,975 23.86 34,975 -48.44 -48.44 0%
6.11 Key Fiscal Information made public 156,505 67,000 42.81 - - 67,000 27,733 17.72 - - 27,733 -58.61 -58.61
6.11.1 Financial Transparency improved 156,505 67,000 42.81 67,000 27,733 17.72 27,733 -58.61 -58.61 0%
6.12 Local PEFA assessment undertaken 198,160 - - - - - - - -
6.12.1 Local PEFA assessment done - - - 95%
Submission of quartely IA Report 98,160 - - - -
LGA sensitized on new PPA 2013 100,000 - - - -
Fund Released (TZS 000's) Expenditure (TZS 000's) % Variance (Actual/Expenditure) %
Complete
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 167 | P a g e
Appendix 10 – Finances for components by source
(a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) (h) (i)
COMPONENT NAME %
SOURCE OF FUNDS
Release of
budget %
Expenditure
of budget %
Expenditure
of released
funds %
Budget Vs
Funds
Released
Budget
Vs
Expenditure
Funds
Released Vs
Expenditure
TOTAL FOR PROGRAM 128,067,753 72,732,259 45,476,446 56.79 35.51 62.53 -43.21 -64.49 -37.47
TOTAL GOT CONTRIBUTION 61,308,415 19,549,837 17,517,405 31.89 28.57 89.60 -68.11 -71.43 -10.40
TOTAL DP CONTIBUTION 66,759,338 53,182,422 27,959,041 79.66 41.88 52.57 -20.34 -58.12 -47.43
1 POLICY ANALYSIS DEPARTMENT 3,820,007 1,096,500 340,505 28.70 8.91 31.05 -71.30 -91.09 -68.95
GOT 800,000 305,700 204,614 38.21 25.58 66.93 -61.79 -74.42 -33.07
DP 3,020,007 790,800 135,891 26.19 4.50 17.18 -73.81 -95.50 -82.82
2 PMO- RALG 6,295,000 4,069,396 1,592,157 64.64 25.29 39.13 -35.36 -74.71 -60.87
GOT 300,000 - - -100.00 -100.00
DP 5,995,000 4,069,396 1,592,157 67.88 26.56 39.13 -32.12 -73.44 -60.87
3 EXTERNAL FINANCE 1,549,840 837,340 412,428 54.03 26.61 49.25 -45.97 -73.39 -50.75
GOT 700,000 12,500 12,500 1.79 1.79 100.00 -98.21 -98.21 0.00
DP 849,840 824,840 399,928 97.06 47.06 48.49 -2.94 -52.94 -51.51
4 MNRS 414,250 217,250 192,884 52.44 46.56 88.78 -47.56 -53.44 -11.22
GOT - - -
DP 414,250 217,250 192,884 52.44 46.56 88.78 -47.56 -53.44 -11.22
5 GOVERNMENT BUDGET DIVISION 5,832,070 2,065,940 403,228 35.42 6.91 19.52 -64.58 -93.09 -80.48
GOT 4,323,720 648,190 193,248 14.99 4.47 29.81 -85.01 -95.53 -70.19
DP 1,508,350 1,417,750 209,980 93.99 13.92 14.81 -6.01 -86.08 -85.19
6 ACC. GENERAL DEPARTMENT 18,534,587 8,328,632 6,579,098 44.94 35.50 78.99 -55.06 -64.50 -21.01
GOT 8,700,000 1,375,000 1,023,116 15.80 11.76 74.41 -84.20 -88.24 -25.59
DP 9,834,587 6,953,632 5,555,982 70.71 56.49 79.90 -29.29 -43.51 -20.10
7 PPPD 6,023,908 5,241,402 3,746,666 87.01 62.20 71.48 -12.99 -37.80 -28.52
GOT 600,000 80,000 50,000 13.33 8.33 62.50 -86.67 -91.67 -37.50
DP 5,423,908 5,161,402 3,696,666 95.16 68.16 71.62 -4.84 -31.84 -28.38
8 GAM 6,473,042 4,947,197 1,653,790 76.43 25.55 33.43 -23.57 -74.45 -66.57
GOT 1,232,970 170,000 164,296 13.79 13.33 96.64 -86.21 -86.67 -3.36
DP 5,240,072 4,777,197 1,489,494 91.17 28.43 31.18 -8.83 -71.57 -68.82
9 INTERNAL AUDITOR GENERAL
DIVISION 7,007,826 4,584,829 2,961,263 65.42 42.26 64.59 -34.58 -57.74 -35.41
GOT 1,913,530 105,000 105,000 5.49 5.49 100.00 -94.51 0.00
DP 5,094,296 4,479,829 2,856,263 87.94 56.07 63.76 -12.06 -43.93 -36.24
10 NATIONAL AUDIT 40,707,623 21,128,650 18,768,048 51.90 46.10 88.83 -48.10 -53.90 -11.17
GOT 33,670,000 15,034,375 14,234,375 44.65 42.28 94.68 -55.35 -57.72 -5.32
DP 7,037,623 6,094,275 4,533,673 86.60 64.42 74.39 -13.40 -35.58 -25.61
11 PPRA 8,575,208 5,480,708 1,424,728 63.91 16.61 26.00 -36.09 -83.39 -74.00
GOT 1,962,500 260,000 34,785 13.25 1.77 13.38 -86.75 -98.23 -86.62
DP 6,612,708 5,220,708 1,389,943 78.95 21.02 26.62 -21.05 -78.98 -73.38
12 TREASURY REGISTRAR 3,714,600 2,964,600 1,857,373 79.81 50.00 62.65 -20.19 -50.00 -37.35
GOT 1,020,000 270,000 268,593 26.47 26.33 99.48 -73.53 -73.67 -0.52
DP 2,694,600 2,694,600 1,588,780 100.00 58.96 58.96 0.00 -41.04 -41.04
13 PO PSM 500,000 192,532 114,332 38.51 22.87 59.38 -61.49 -77.13 -40.62
GOT - - -
DP 500,000 192,532 114,332 38.51 22.87 59.38 -61.49 -77.13 -40.62
14 FINANCIAL INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 5,437,000 2,953,750 1,445,805 54.33 26.59 48.95 -45.67 -73.41 -51.05
GOT 2,050,000 436,750 414,461 21.30 20.22 94.90 -78.70 -79.78 -5.10
DP 3,387,000 2,517,000 1,031,344 74.31 30.45 40.98 -25.69 -69.55 -59.02
15 ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT 1,007,500 747,500 222,100 74.19 22.04 29.71 -25.81 -77.96 -70.29
GOT 403,500 143,500 140,000 35.56 34.70 97.56 -64.44 -65.30 -2.44
DP 604,000 604,000 82,100 100.00 13.59 13.59 0.00 -86.41 -86.41
16 GCU 2,173,800 1,001,300 591,059 46.06 27.19 59.03 -53.94 -72.81 -40.97
GOT 1,114,400 153,400 153,303 13.77 13.76 99.94 -86.23 -86.24 -0.06
DP 1,059,400 847,900 437,756 80.04 41.32 51.63 -19.96 -58.68 -48.37
17 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6,965,492 4,637,528 2,552,663 66.58 36.65 55.04 -33.42 -63.35 -44.96
GOT 2,517,795 555,422 519,114 22.06 20.62 93.46 -77.94 -79.38 -6.54
DP 4,447,697 4,082,106 2,033,549 91.78 45.72 49.82 -8.22 -54.28 -50.18
18 ZANZIBAR 2,000,000 1,500,000 334,132 75.00 16.71 22.28 -25.00 -83.29 -77.72
GOT - - -
DP 2,000,000 1,500,000 334,132 75.00 16.71 22.28 -25.00 -83.29 -77.72
19 10 RASs 1,536,000 929,737 398,519 60.53 25.95 42.86 -39.47 -74.05 -57.14
GOT - - -
DP 1,536,000 929,737 398,519 60.53 25.95 42.86 -39.47 -74.05 -57.14
% VarianceBudgets
(TZS 000's)
2012-to date
Fund Released
(TZS 000's)
2012-to date
Expenditure
(TZS 000's)
2012-to date
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 168 | P a g e
Appendix 11– Risk analysis
Description of risk
Risk to KRA
achievement
[High, Moderate,
Low]
Management strategy
1. Initiatives that encompass more than one PFM cycle can lead to unnecessary delays and management confusion.
Moderate Initiatives should be separately identified,
monitored and managed for separate PFM
processes and cycles i.e. GoT, LGA and Zanzibar
should be clearly separate from each other.
2. Scope becomes too wide to ensure that priority initiatives are completed.
High Care in the choice of initiatives so that the width,
complexity and ambition of the programme is
managed to ensure sufficient attention is given to
the priority initiatives that address the core PFM
processes.
3. It is not possible to measure the impact of initiatives without initial benchmark measurements.
Moderate To facilitate the measurement of the impact of
initiatives, especially training, benchmark
measurements should be undertaken prior to and
at some time post the initiative being undertaken.
The first part of any future reform programme must
be measurement of a set of carefully considered
and comprehensive benchmarks.
4. Where KRAs do not correspond clearly with the PFM cycle there is potential for lack of ownership by component managers and possible duplication of effort.
Moderate The KRAs should correspond closely with the PFM
cycle. Initiatives should be organised to address,
reform and improve discrete parts of the cycle.
This ensures ownership by component managers
and tends to eliminate duplication. In the report
we identify a potential set of key result areas that
could implement this recommendation.
5. Where initiatives are not designed to achieve sustainable reform, resources are wasted.
High Outputs, milestones and associated initiatives
should be designed to create sustainable reform
and not to simply fund recurrent expenditure. To
become a true reform programme the steps taken
within the reform should include the
implementation of strategies to make activities
sustainable within the programme’s lifetime.
6. Less than optimal output is achieved when linkages, and critical paths are not identified.
Moderate Linkages and dependencies between milestones
are established to ensure that the critical paths for
the reform can be more easily identified. This
ensures that these critical milestones are properly
identified and hence appropriately managed.
7. Initiatives can be overlooked when priorities
Moderate Output and milestone priorities should be
identified. This is an important part of stakeholder
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 169 | P a g e
Description of risk
Risk to KRA
achievement
[High, Moderate,
Low]
Management strategy
are not identified. expectation management and assists in mitigating
funding risk. It is understandable and acceptable
to focus on improving PEFA scores but the focus
should always be on core PFM improvement. This
benefits the whole of GoT.
8. Full value for money may not be achieved.
Low The PFMRP should undertake a general review of
all milestones and activities and eliminate those
where the need and achievement of value for
money is less certain. This will complement other
risk management strategies in 6and 7.
9. Uncertainty that a milestone is achieving a desirable impact.
High Milestones should ideally relate to measurable
outputs. Where they do not, a related output
milestone should be established. Failure to
identify measurable outputs and outcomes makes
it difficult to be assured of impact.
10. Investment activity distorts the true value of reform inputs.
High Choosing to fund capital asset acquisition, such as
acquiring or erecting a building, is incompatible
with a reform programme. As an investment
activity the acquisition of a capital asset should not
be considered a reforming activity.
11. The value of the whole programme is compromised by the failure to address critical weaknesses in PFM.
High The programme should pay particular attention to
areas identified by PEFA as being critical areas of
poor PFM performance. Attention to effectiveness
of non-salary expenditure internal controls and
timeliness and regularity of accounts reconciliation
are currently inadequately addressed.
12. The current initiatives in respect of the transition from cash to accrual accounting compromise the integrity of the PFM cycle and do not achieve their full potential as an agent for positive change.
High The PFMRP should include initiatives to look at
ways to include all aspects of the PFM cycle in the
transition from cash to accrual so that the benefits
of this transition can improve the whole cycle. The
purpose is to transform the other processes within
the PFM cycle to secure the real benefits to
resource utilisation that the transition from cash
based to accrual based financial management
should generate. Accounting for execution must be
compatible with budgeting in order to facilitate
effective subsequent review and oversight and
optimise resource allocation and budgetary
control. The transition from cash to accrual should
be undertaken to establish a clearer understanding
of the financial position so that real costs can be
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 170 | P a g e
Description of risk
Risk to KRA
achievement
[High, Moderate,
Low]
Management strategy
determined for the optimal allocation of resources
and so that expenditure and income is recognised
at the time that goods or services are received or
delivered. This means that current assets and
current liabilities are fully and promptly identified
ensuring that payment arrears and revenue/tax
collection arrears are known and controlled.
13. Accountability and transparency in PFM is compromised if the financial statements required by the legislature are not being produced effectively.
High The PFMRP should include an initiative that looks
at the statutory financial statements, their purpose,
their need and how they should be produced.
Since the Government of Tanzania intends to be a
regional leader in the adoption of accrual based
accounting it must include in the reform
programme the necessary legislative review that
ensures that the positions of the various funds and
controlled entities of the various levels of
government can be appropriately consolidated to
both produce meaningful reports to the legislature,
shareholders and public whilst at the same time
meeting international accounting and reporting
standards.
14. Accountability and transparency in PFM is reduced if the Accountant General’s position as GoT’s accountant is compromised.
High The PFMRP should introduce an initiative that
strengthens and clarifies the Accountant General’s
position as GoT’s accountant. In particular this
should address contradictions with the role of the
Commissioner for Budget. It should re-establish
the Accountant General as the author of reliable,
quality budget execution financial data.
15. Accountability and transparency in PFM is reduced if the Controller and Auditor General’s position as an independent fully functional supreme audit institution is compromised.
High PFMRP should include an initiative that addresses
the depreciation of the independence of the
Controller and Auditor General and National Audit
Office of Tanzania as a result of the recent
changes in budget scrutiny and approval
processes.
16. If not clearly led at an appropriate level the PFMRP will not fully achieve its potential.
Moderate The DPS PFM should take a more active and
prominent role in overall PFMRP management and
guidance. Any overlaps and confusions with the
role of the DPS Treasury should be eliminated.
The DPS PFM should take on a pro-active role in
ensuring that the reform programme is not
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 171 | P a g e
Description of risk
Risk to KRA
achievement
[High, Moderate,
Low]
Management strategy
undertaking activity that results in inconsistency
with good PFM practice.
17. The lack of immediate expert PFM advice leads to wasted resources through the production of inappropriate outputs.
Moderate There is a need for a capable PFM Adviser to
ensure reform opportunities are not being missed
through the lack of an immediate overall PFM
view.
18. Insufficient quality review leads to promoting activity that is inconsistent with good practice.
Moderate The JSC should meet every three months and
take a much more active role in the quality review
of reform programme outputs to ensure that the
reform programme is not promoting activity that is
inconsistent with good practice.
19. The lack of clear ownership of milestones by component managers leads to initiatives not proceeding as planned.
Moderate There should be a very clear ownership of each
milestone by a component manager. That
ownership should be recorded in the M&E
Framework document.
20. PFMRP Secretariat staff resource is wasted through inadequate planning and utilisation.
Low The PFMRP Secretariat staff should prepare
individual detailed time-bound work plans against
which they themselves, the Programme Manager
and the DPS PFM can measure achievement.
21. Programme management is compromised by the failure to have critical information readily available.
Moderate The PFMRP Secretariat should keep and have
available, files of meeting papers, minutes,
resolutions and the like for all JSC, PMC and TWG
meetings. The secretariat should also retain
copies of all component managers detailed and
costed work plans for the achievement of each of
their milestones. These documents are essential
to enable the secretariat to advise the Programme
Manager and the DPS PFM on the detailed
progress of the implementation of the reforms.
22. The PFMRP is not appropriately managed through the PFMRP Secretariat not being given the appropriate role.
Moderate The PFMRP Secretariat should have a pro-active
role in supporting programme management’s
immediate management and coordination needs
for the reform programme. This should include the
DPS PFM ensuring that the secretariat’s finance
specialist has access to up to date data from the
IFMIS on the financial performance of the
component managers’ use of funds.
23. Failure to distinguish between recurrent and development expenditure in
High There are mechanisms that can be employed that
will allow warrants not to lapse at financial year-
end or some other carry-over arrangements can
Final Report - Mid-Term Review for Public Finance Management Reform Program (PFMRP) Phase Four, Tanzania
INNOVEX©2015 172 | P a g e
Description of risk
Risk to KRA
achievement
[High, Moderate,
Low]
Management strategy
GoT procedures and regulations reduces the ability to fully utilise development funding.
be made that allow development funding not to be
lost at the end of a financial year. The DPS PFM
as part of PFMRP IV should supervise an initiative
that looks into and identifies a solution to this
problem.
24. Failure to include all development partner funding in the programme leads to duplication of effort and/or difficulties in accounting for funds utilisation and associated impact.
Low All development partners be encouraged to
become part of the PFMRP, and preferably basket
fund participants, provided of course that the
initiatives being supported are appropriately
relevant.
25. Inconsistent use of the monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework leads to outputs and milestones being missed or duplicated.
Low The M&E framework to be consistently prepared
and utilised constantly throughout the
implementation of PFMRP IV. It should appear in
its entirety in each progress and supervision
report. The component manager, linkages and
interdependencies, and level of priority
information should be added.
26. Inaccurate milestone progress descriptions lead to an inappropriate assessment of the status of the programme’s completion.
Low More careful use of the term “on track” in
progress and supervision mission reporting. In
both the progress reports and the annual joint
supervision reports there are many milestones
that are described as “on track” when the
activities under the milestone have not even
started. These superfluous assertions tend to
skew the overall assessment of the progress of
the programme with a large number of “on track”
milestones that simply are not.
27. The reform programme’s deviation from planned progress is not noticed promptly.
Low Progress reports to be prepared on a quarterly
basis.
28. Insufficient stakeholder management leads to failures in reform programme progress and impact.
High Stakeholders not only need to be kept informed,
they also need to be actively engaged and
managed. A pro-active stakeholder management
strategy should be adopted by the programme
management and be facilitated by the PFMRP
Secretariat.